Source: https://www.ftbchambers.co.uk/barristers/douglas-edwards-qc
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 07:13:46+00:00

Document:
"He had very good suggestions as to ways to support our case, and identified the evidence that strengthened it."
Douglas Edwards QC practices in the fields of town and country planning, infrastructure compulsory purchase, environment, administrative and local government, highway law and property law. He is also a recognised expert in the law relating to common land and town/village greens, easements and restrictive covenants.
He appears regularly for both appellants and local planning and other authorities at inquiries and in the courts.
Douglas Edwards was elected a bencher of Lincoln's Inn in 2017, and is a member of the Inn's Estates Committee. He was appointed by the Government and has served as an assistant Paliamentary boundary commissioner and as lead assistant commissioner for the East Midlands region. In that capacity, his role has involved holding hearing and considering representations into proposals to modify Parliamentary constituencies.
R (Savage) v Mansfield DC  EWCA Civ 4 - appeared at JR into claim to quash permission for residential led development on edge of Sherwood Forest on grounds relating to breach of Birds Directive; R (Bermondsey Village Action Group) v Mayor of London and others­  EWCA Civ 1738 - instructed by Mayor of London and TfL to defend Judicial Review into grant of planning permission for redevelopment of London Bridge Station.
Instructed by Mayor of London (2016) to oppose at inquiry an appeal against his refusal to grant planning permission for expansion of City Airport.
Instructed by Oxford City Council in respect of its emerging local plan.
West Stevenage Consortium - six month inquiry into 5,000 unit housing scheme at West Stevenage.
Douglas also has particular experience in advising on the preparation of local plans and appearing, for LPAs and landowner, at local plan examinations. He is presently instructed to represent Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council at the joint examination into their respective local plans and, as such, is well versed in current issues concerning defining housing and other development needs, identifying land supply, green belt and conservation issues. He is also presently instructed by a series of other local authorities - including Redbridge LBC and Oxford City Council - in respect of their respective emerging local plans.
Douglas has a particular expertise in advising and appearing in cases in matters concerning the interpretation and enforcement of planning obligations and conditions. He is asked frequently to advise local authorities and developers in respect of disputes concerning planning obligations and has acted recently in several matters which have proceeded to arbitration and to trial before the Chancery Division in this field. A recent example if this is LB Newham v Ali in the Court of Appeal which is the leading case concerning the enforcement of planning obligations. He acted for St.Modwen Developments in R. (on the application of Skelmersdale Ltd Partnership) v West Lancashire BC and St.Modwen Developments Limited  EWCA Civ 1260 which concerned the interpretation of a permission on a retail planning permission. He has also acted recently for Swansea City Council at an appeal concerning the interpretation of a series of historic planning permission for a large retail park outside the City.
Douglas has particular experience concerning viability issue arising in respect of planning obligations, and development proposals more generally. He advises regularly, and appears at public inquiries and other hearing, where development viability is in issue. He has advised the Mayor of London in respect of development at Convoys Wharf, at City Forum and at Mount Pleasant Sorting Office all of which have rise to challenges to the Mayor's approach to assessment of viability issues in respect of planning applications for large scale housing-led development for which the Mayor became the determining local planning authority.
He also has particular experience in disputes concerning redevelopment of public houses where issues as to viability of continued or recommenced commercial use is at issue. He has been instructed in the last few years by both developers/landowners and by local planning authorities in respect of proposals to redevelop or change the use of public houses on grounds of lack of viability.
Douglas appears regularly in courts and tribunals, as well as advising, in respect of assets of community value. He is presently instructed by Cala Homes Plc/Banner Homes Limited in a claim, which has been heard in the Upper Tribunal which is proceeding to the Court of Appeal, concerning whether trespassory use of undeveloped land can properly give rise to ACV listing (see  UKFTT CR_2014_0018 (GRC)). Douglas also represented the South Bank Centre in respect of the highly controversial skate-board park beneath the Royal Festival Hall on the South Bank, London, in respect of both an application to list the area as an ACV and in respect of an application for its registration as a town green.
Douglas has developed a particular expertise in the complex field of CIL and in particular in advising on the interpretation and application of the CIL Regulations. He is presently instructed in respect of an important case concerning the interpretation of the transitional provisions to the 2010 Regulations. He has also advised extensively concerning the preparation and examination of charging schedules and on appeals concerning liability notices.
Douglas has developed considerable experience in advising local authorities and their development partners concerning land assembly exercises. He has particular experience in the operation of the procedure for compulsory acquisition as well as appropriation of local authority land for planning purposes within the provisions of the TCPA 1990, and its implications including in respect of extinguishment of covenants and rights of way and in respect of the compensation provisions which follow there from. He is at present engaged to advise a local authority concerning the appropriation of land for major housing development in the Midlands together with the various compensation claims which have arisen. He is also advising in respect of similar land acquisition issues concerning the proposed Garden Bridge, in Central London.
He has considerable experience of planning enforcement both at inquiry, and in the High Court in the context of injunction applications. He is regularly instructed by local planning authorities for complex enforcement cases and is noted for handling detailed factual disputes arising under ground (d) appeals and in lawful development certificate matters. In 2008 he appeared for Lambeth LBC, the successful respondent, in a judicial review which considered a wide range of issues concerning planning enforcement against advertisements and interpretation of schemes of delegation (R (oao Blow Up Media) v Lambeth LBC [2008 EWHC 1912 (Admin). In 2015, he represented the London Borough of Newham at an inquiry and subsequently in court proceedings concerning an unlawful mosque in the Borough.
Douglas had been instructed on a number of listed building cases and has developed particular expertise in advising upon, and appearing at, inquiries in relation to enabling development proposals affecting listed buildings and in applying the guidance published by English Heritage concerning that subject.
His other areas of specialism include mineral planning (in which he has recently had two notable successes, one for an appellant and one for a mineral planning authority) and also water and riverbank related development. He appeared recently in a controversial inquiry concerning the right to moor vessels temporarily on the River Thames.
Douglas is instructed regularly to advise on and to promote DCOs at examination. He is presently retained by National Grid to advise on its proposed electricity transmission connection in Lancashire and Cumbria (including within the Lake District National Park) to serve the proposed new nuclear power station at Moorside.
He was instructed by Highways England in respect of the DCO seeking powers to dual the A30 in Cornwall. He was instructed by BAA in respect of its proposals for a second runway at Stansted Airport, by the Mayor of London in respect of his decision to refuse consent to expand City Airport and by the local planning authority in respect of Thames Water's proposed desalination plant in East London. Douglas, while still a junior barrister, was instructed by LB Southwark in respect of the Thameslink proposals in the Borough.
Douglas was an assistant editor of the Infrastructure Planning Handbook.
Douglas is recognised as one of the leading practitioners in this complex and specialist area of land and has been involved in many of the most significant cases in the field.
He appears regularly for landowners and applicants at inquiries and has advised extensively on the subject. He is also asked regularly to sit as an inspector on behalf of registration authorities.
Douglas also advises and acts regularly in respect of applications under the Commons Legislation to secure extinguishment or amendment of rights of common and other applications under the Commons Act 2006. He has acted at commons act inquiries in respect of s.16 deregistration applications and s.38 works applications for a number of utility companies, renewable energy providers, local authorities and landowners. He has recently acted on numerous occasions for Highways England in respect of commons issues arising form highway improvement schemes.
In 2014 Douglas appeared in the Supreme Court in R (Barkas) v North Yorkshire CC  UKSC 31, an important case concerning whether local authority land is capable of being registered as a town green under Commons Act 2006.
In 2016 and 2017 he has appeared in R (Lancashire County Council) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs  EWHC 1238which raised a wide range of issues concerning TVG law including the application of the statutory incompatibility defence to land held for education purposes. The case is now proceeding to the Court of Appeal.
In 2016 he also appeared for Surrey County Council in R (NHS Property Services Ltd.) v Surrey County Council  EWHC 1715 (Admin), which involved a challenge to a decision of the County Council as commons registration authority to register land as a green under the Commons Act 2006. The case concerned, inter alia, the power of a registration authority to reject the recommendation of its inspector and also the applicability of the statutory incompatibility defence to land held by the NHS.
In 2016 he also appeared for the successful claimant in R (Goodman) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs  EWHC 2576 (Admin) in which a decision to reject a TVG application was quashed on the basis of wrong interpretation of the law concerning implied appropriation of land and in R (Allaway) v Oxfordshire County Council  EWHC 2677 (Admin), an important decision by Patterson J. concerning the relationship between use of public footpaths and use of land to support a claim to registration as a TVG under the Commons Act 2006.
In 2016 and 2017 he has appeared at numerous public inquiries, generally for landowners, to oppose TVG application. Examples include acting for Stena Lines in respect of an application to register land at Holyhead Port as a TVG, for landowner in respect of a large greenfield site in Wokingham.
In 2016, he also appeared for the claimant at a lengthy trial in the Chancery Division arising from an application made under s.14 of the Commons Act 1965 to reverse a registration of land in Essex as a TVG (see TW Logistics Ltd v Essex CC  EWHC 185 (Ch)).
In 2015, Douglas was instructed by Belway Homes plc at a two week public inquiry to oppose successfully a TVG application in respect of an extensive area of development land on the edge of Billingshurst, Sussex.
Douglas appeared for the successful landowner in objecting to an application to register land at Brill, Buckinghamshire as a village green. The case gave rise to important issues concerning whether land held by a local authority under the housing acts is capable of becoming a green. He also appeared in 2008 and 2011 to oppose successfully controversial applications to register a large development site in Woking as a green. The lengthy inquiry into the first application gave rise to complicated legal issues including whether a highway could be registered as a green. The inquiry into the subsequent application led to the much-relied on decision that cause of action estoppel applies to Commons Act proceedings. In 2011 he appeared for Persimmon homes to successfully oppose an application to register as a green a large area of Weston Airfield, Somerset and in the same year appeared for Fairview Homes in their successful opposition to registration of land in Hertfordshire.
Douglas appeared for the TVG applicant in the House of Lords, as well as the lower courts, in the "Trap Grounds" case (formally reported as Oxford City Council v. Oxfordshire County Council and Robinson. This case raises a range of critical issues as to the determination and administration of applications to register land as a town or village green.
R. (Beresford) v. Sunderland City Council (2004) 1 AC 889 - he appeared for the successful appellant in this decision in which the House of Lords, overturning the lower courts, held that the implied permission of a landowner was not capable or rendering use other than as of right.
McLaren v Kubiak  EWHC 1065 (Ch) - he appeared for the defendant who successfully obtained an order striking out an application for a declaration that land could not be registered as green. He succeeded in persuading the court that it had no jurisdiction to decide whether land qualified as a green.
High Peak Borough Council v Derbyshire County Council - he appeared for the county council in a case concerning its decision to register land as green; the court held that where any part of the land applied for was a green, there was an obligation to register land as a green.
Douglas’ experience in the law relating to common land and green has led to regular instructions to advise local authorities and their development partners concerning the management of open space. He is instructed frequently to advise local authorities in respect of the exercise of powers of management and use of public open space. He has also advised several local authorities concerning proposals for rationalisation and disposal of open space and the navigation through the complex procedures and decision-making processes which are involved.
In 2017 Douglas was instructed by LB Wandsworth to oppose an application for judicial review by which the Council's exercise of statutory powers to permit the use of Battersea Park for the "formula e" motor racing event was challenged.
Douglas has a busy practice in the field of environmental law. He advises and appears regularly in statutory nuisance appeals for both local authorities and commercial operators in both the civil and criminal courts. His clients include a considerable number of large industrial companies and public utilities.
He has had particular experience also in private nuisance cases and has acted in several cases concerning nuisance arising from the agricultural sector. He has acted in particular both for claimants and for the farming industry in respect of private nuisance actions arising out of farming operations. He acted for Staffordshire County Council in respect of an enforcement action and subsequently for an injunction to restrain unlawfully tipping of liquid waste on farmland.
He also acts regularly for the water industry. By way of example, he has been instructed by Thames Water Utilities to defend a prosecution concerning statutory nuisance arising at the Crossness Sewage Treatment Plan. He has also represented Anglian Water in respect of similar actions.
He has recently been instructed by a London local authority in the first reported action in the High Court for an injunction to restrain a serious statutory nuisance from a licensed premises, where criminal proceedings has not proved to be adequate remedy.
He has also prosecuted and defended in criminal proceedings involving breach of the IPC and waste management licenses. He has recently successfully defended a multi-national company against a range of offences brought under part 1 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
In the environmental field, Douglas has particular experience in water related matters and has recently been heavily involved in statutory nuisance proceedings against a water utility, in an inquiry into a discharge consent application for a water utility and is presently engaged in a large civil claim by a landfill operator against a water company in respect arising out of a trade effluent agreement.
Douglas appears regularly for claimants and acquiring authorities at CPO inquiries and in the Lands Tribunal.
He has particular experience in dealing with compulsory purchase compensation claims concerning agricultural holdings and affecting minerals rights, particularly arising from transport and infrastructure schemes.
He also has particular experience in respect of promoting compulsory purchase orders affecting common land and rights of common, and has been instructed by the Highways England and several local highway authorities in respect of order affecting such land, most recently in respect of the duelling of the A30 in Cornwall.
He was retained by TfL as part of its panel of counsel to act for the compensating authority in respect of claims arising from Crossrail, and acted in respect of many such claims, particularly arising from acquisition of interest in retail units, A3/A4 premises and betting offices in London. In the past few years, he has appeared in a large and complex loss of profits claim arising from a road scheme affecting a private hospital and nursing homes, and in respect of an extinguishment claim in respect of an agricultural unit arising from a rail scheme, in both cases representing the claimant. He also represented TfL to oppose successfully at inquiry a purchase order arising from the Crossrail scheme.
He represented Nottinghamshire County Council in respect of a compensation claim for loss of land at a retail park, as result of a road scheme. He appeared, as junior to Robin Purchas QC, in a major and long running claim arising from an urban development scheme in central Bristol.
Douglas has particular experience in respect of disturbance and loss of profit claims, and has acted and advised recently in respect of several cases concerning disturbance compensation.
He also has particular experience in compensation claims arising from extinguishment of covenants and rights of way following acquisition or appropriation of land by local authorities, and is presently retained by a local authority who are addressing several substantial claims following appropriation of land under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. He also advised Westminster City Council in respect of the compensation implications arising from the Garden Bridge project, in Central London.
Douglas is presently instructed in to advise on, and to promote, a large CPO to bring forward a Mayoral housing zone in East London and also, in the same area, to promote a CPO to acquire a large brownfield site allocated for development in a local plan, following a refusal by the landowner to release the site for development.
Douglas' recent parliamentary practice has involved representing several landowners and developers as petitioners against the Crossrail Bill and, more recently, HS2. He appeared for Network Rail in its petition against powers sought to be taken through the London Local Authorities Bill in 2007.
From his early days in practice, Douglas has been instructed to appear and advise on a wide range of highway related matters.
He has promoted substantial road schemes both for the Highway Agency and for local highway authorities. These schemes have involved both orders under the Highways Act 1980 and compulsory purchase orders.
He has appeared in many inquiries concerning applications to modify the definitive footpaths map made under the Wildlife and Countryside Act and applications to stop up or divert footpaths and bridleways. He has recently acted for Newhaven Port at a lengthy public inquiry concerning applications to add footpaths within the operational Port into to the definitive map. He acted for Oxfordshire County Council in the court proceedings which arose from the highly controversial order to stop-up a bridleway which passed through the BMW plant at Cowley, Oxford. He is also presently instructed by Millgate Properties in respect of a claim to footpaths over a private estate in Hampshire. He is instructed by Ealing LBC, as local highway authority, in respect of a claim to footpaths over land intended to be used by QPR as a training ground.
Acting for Network Rail on several such applications involving unsafe level crossings.
R (Hargrave) v. Stroud District Council (2003) 1 P&CR 1 - he appeared in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal in this case, which established the power for a local authority to abandon a footpath diversion order after it was made.
Douglas has particular experience in the application of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991. He has recently appeared for Virgin in defending the company successfully against a prosecution from excedance of a street works licence where the works had extended beyond the licenced period. The case gave rise to important issues concerning the relationship between fixed penalty notices and prosecution.
Douglas also acted, as junior to Lord Kingsland QC, for Thames Water Utilities Ltd. v. London Underground Ltd.  EWCA Civ 615 - which concerned the cost sharing provisions under the NRSWA 1991 - in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Douglas has acted in an advisory capacity and as an advocate in a wide range of property matters including landlord and tenant, mortgages, easements and restrictive covenants. He appears regularly in the Chancery Division and higher courts, before the Lands Tribunal (in particular in respect of restrictive covenant matters) and before the residential property tribunal.

References: EWCA 
 EWCA 
 EWCA 
 UKSC 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 EWCA