Skip to main content

T: 020 7353 8415

Gregory Jones QC

Gregory Jones QC

Year of call: 1991 (QC 2011)

Practice areas: Planning, Environment, Compulsory Purchase and Compensation, Major Infrastructure Projects, Local Government, Ecclesiastical Law and Religious Liberty, Rating, Public Law, European Law

Gregory Jones QC, Town and Country Planning

Gregory Jones's planning practice spans a wide range of issues including major retail schemes, energy and transport infrastructure, housing development, and mineral and waste planning as well as proposed tall buildings.

Gregory 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. Gregory has also considerable experience acting for local planning authorities in respect of gypsy and traveller work.  Gregory is also one of the few barrister with an expert knowledge of the criminal law as it applies to planning enforcement

Instructed on a number of listed building cases Gregory has expertise in enabling development proposals affecting listed buildings and in applying the guidance published by English Heritage concerning that subject. 

With specialist knowledge of EU law Gregory is a particular expert in environmental impact assessment and the habitats directive especially in respect of major planning schemes. 

Short listed as Environmental and Planning Law Junior of the Year 2010/11 (Chambers &Partners), directories in particular highlight his deep understanding of EU implications for planning law (see e.g. Chambers & Partners 2011, 2010 and 2009).

The most recent edition of Chambers & Partners (2015) says:

"A likeable, quick-thinking advocate who is always fun to work with and who shows a deep understanding of the implications of EU environmental law on the UK planning system." "He has a very calm and reassuring approach, and his expertise in environmental impact assessment matters is invaluable." And also that:

"An authority on environmental impact assessment, habitats directives and wider planning and environment issues. He is also renowned for his expertise in matters involving CPOs."

Legal 500 describes Gregory as 'excellent.'

Selected Comments from Directories

Chambers & Partners (2011) states:

"'Gregory Jones received tremendous feedback from sources for his ability to handle complex projects at the intersection of planning and environmental law. Brilliant on black-letter law, he can tackle the most abstruse issues."

"Fantastic grasp of technical issues, which makes him a great choice for really complex legal problems."
Chambers & Partners (2010)

"Gregory Jones deserves recognition as '[an extremely astute advocate'.  He has special expertise in EU law in connection with planning and environmental law."
Chambers & Partners (2009)

"Technically excellent" and "on top of the law".
RTPI's Annual Survey of Planning Practitioners (2008)

"Rising star Gregory Jones...has also acted on the Olympics, as well as Crossrail and is well regarded by his peers."
Legal 500 (2007/08)

"Jones is regarded as very client-focused and quick on his feet."
RTPI's Annual Survey of Planning Practitioners 2006

"Noted in particular for his performance in judicial review proceedings."
Chambers and Partners 2007

Memberships

  • Member of the Planning and Environment Bar Association
  • Legal Associate of the Royal Town Planning Institute
  • Fellow of the Institute of Quarrying

Selected Planning Cases

Court cases are listed first followed by planning inquires.  The cases have been grouped into general subject headings although many cases overlap into more than one subject grouping.

Environmental Impact Assessment

  • R (on the application of Brown) v Carlisle City Council and Stobarts Air Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 523; Times June 24th, 2010, [2010] All ER (D) 181 (May) grant of planning permission for a freight distribution centre at an airport in breach of the EIA Directive where the environmental statement accompanying the planning application did not address the impact of other proposed works at the airport contained within section 106 agreement.
  • R (on the application of Ardagh Glass Ltd) v Chester City Council [2009] EWHC 745 (Admin); [2009] Env L.R. 34; [2009] N.P.C. 59 mandatory requirement for local planning authority to take enforcement action and lawfulness of retrospective planning permissions for EIA development.
  • R (on the application of Barker) v Bromley LBC (C-290/03) European Court of Justice (First Chamber), 4 May 2006; [2006] Q.B. 764; [2006] 3 W.L.R. 492; [2006] E.C.R. I-3949; Article 2(1) and Article 4(2) of the EIA Directive had to be interpreted as requiring an environmental impact assessment to be carried out if, in the case of grant of consent comprising more than one stage, it became apparent, in the course of the second stage, that the project was likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of its nature, size or location.
  • Berkeley v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (No.1) House [2001] 2 A.C. 603; [2000] 3 W.L.R. 420; [2000] 3 All E.R. 897; [2001] 2 C.M.L.R. 38. The limits of the powers of the court not to quash a decision taken in breach of the EIA Directive.
  • R (on the application of Prophet) v York City Council [2002] EWHC 588 (Admin); requirement of environmental impact assessment and duty to give reasons.
  • R (on the application of Bedford) v Islington LBC [2002] EWHC 2044 (Admin); [2003] Env. L.R. 22. When granting planning permission for a new stadium for Arsenal FC, the local authority had not been obliged to hold a public inquiry or to disclose the report of a company which had been appointed to assist it in negotiations with the club on land issues.
  • Ron the application of)Terrafirma Properties Ltd v Manchester City Council [2002] EWHC 702 (Admin). EIA Cumulative impact and delegation of powers.
  • R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions ex p. Marson [1999] 1 C.M.L.R. 268; [1998] Env. L.R. 761; (1999) 77 P. & C.R. 202; [1998] 3 P.L.R. 90; [1998] J.P.L. 869; [1998] N.P.C. 81; Times, May 18, 1998. Whether the Secretary of State had a duty to give reason when exercising his discretion to determine whether an assessment was required.

Strategic Environmental Assessment

  • West Kensington Estate Tenants and Residents Association v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC [2013] EWHC 2834 (Admin) whether housing SPD’s should be subject to SEA.
  • Oxford Diocesan Board of Finance v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2013] EWHC 802 (Admin); [2013] J.P.L. 1285; [2013] A.C.D. 96; [2013] 17 E.G. 98 (C.S.) weight to be given to SPD's which not subject to SEA.
  • Re Alternative A5 Alliance's Application for Judicial Review[2013] NIQB 30; [2014] N.I. 96, SEA required for the Northern Ireland Programme for Government 2008–2011, The Investment Strategy for Northern Ireland 2008/2018, and the Department for Regional Development Investment Delivery Plan for Roads 2008 relied upon in respect of A5 dualling scheme.
  • Cogent Land LLP v Rochford DC [2012] EWHC 2542 (Admin); [2013] 1 P. & C.R. 2; [2013] J.P.L. 170 ability of planning authority to male good earlier defects in Environment Report for the purposes of SEA Directive.
  • R. (on the application of Wakil (t/a Orya Textiles)) v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC2012] EWHC 1411 (QB); [2013] Env. L.R. 3; [2013] 1 P. & C.R. 13; [2012] J.P.L. 1334: SPD quashed due to lack of Environmental Report.
  • Oxford University v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (2010) Challenge to South East Plan in respect of review of green belt boundaries and lack of proper SEA.
  • Seaport (NI) Ltd v Department of Environment (No 2) (High Court, Northern Ireland) Re Seaport (NI) Limited application (Seaport No 2) Judicial review challenge as to whether open to the Department for the Environment to declare it "non feasible" for development plan to comply with SEA Directive high court (Weatherup J) referred series of question to the European Court of Justice (ongoing).
  • Re Murdock Group Limited - application for judicial review in the  high court in Northern Ireland challenging Newry Plan (2008) in respect of absence of SEA.
  • Re Irwin Glenbank Limited - application for judicial review in the  high court in Northern Ireland  challenging Newry Plan (2008) in respect of absence of SEA Directive and challenging Craigavon Town Centre Boundaries and Retail Designations Plan 2010 (2008 No 7281/01) (judicial review of the decisions of the Department of the Environment (Northern Ireland) taken on the 30th June 2008 to adopt the Craigavon Town Centre Boundaries and Retail Designations Plan 2010) also associated  case of  Re Vico Kent Limited -application for judicial review in the high court in Northern Ireland challenging Craigavon Town Centre Boundaries and Retail Designations Plan 2010.
  • Seaport (Investments) Ltd v Department of the Environment (No 1) (Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland and high court [2007] NIQB 62; [2008] Env. L.R. 23). Successfully acted for Seaport in landmark case on whether planning system in Northern Ireland fails to comply with the requirement of the SEA Directive. Reference made to the European Court of Justice.

Minerals and Waste

  • Re CALNI application. Judicial review challenge to decision to approve Rose Energy's chicken waste incinerator at Glenavy without holding public inquiry into the planning application. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11421505
  • Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Peak District National Park Authority v Bleaklow Industries Ltd & MM C Midlands Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 206; (2009) 2 P. & C.R. 21; [2009] J.P.L. 1477; [2009] N.P.C. 46. Successfully acted for Peak District National Park on landmark case concerning the meaning of "winning" and "working" of minerals planning consent.
  • Associated British Ports v Hampshire CC and others [2008] EWHC 1540; [2008] ALL ER (D) 83
    Successfully acted for ABP in relation to Dibden Bay in a high court challenge to Hampshire Minerals Core Strategy. One of the first high court challenges to examine the meaning of the "soundness" test. Plan held to fail soundness test. Important high court guidance on the time period for bringing challenges to development plans.
  • R (on the application of Richardson) v North Yorkshire CC Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 19 December 2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1860; [2004] 1 W.L.R. 1920; [2004] 2 All E.R. 31; [2004] Env. L.R. 34. Planning permission for extension to quarry. Model Code of Conduct for Councillors. Environmental Impact Assessment and duty to give reasons.
  • Swindon Borough Council v First Secretary of State and Hanson Products Ltd [2003] EWHC 670 (Admin). Noise in relation to development of minerals railhead.
  • Warboys Hazardous Waste Landfill Inquiry (2005). The first inquiry following coming into force of the hazardous waste directive. Press coverage:-http://www2.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/db/pressrel.nsf/729e5777b124350980256b560033a513/c16c0c85009186fe8025701c003560a0?OpenDocument.
  • Promoted Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Waste Local Plan (2002).
  • Promoted Bedfordshire and Luton Waste and Minerals Local Plan (2003).
  • Kennet II Landfill Section 78 Appeal Inquiry (2002).
  • Appeared for the Western Rivers Waste Authority at the Belvedere incinerator public inquiry. Application by Riverside Resource Recovery Limited. Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and Section 90 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Construction and operation of Energy from Waste Power Station of 72MW capacity (gross) at Norman Road, Belvedere, Bexley.

Housing and Tall Buildings

  • R (on the application of Havard) v South Kesteven DC, [2006] EWHC 1373 (Admin); [2006] J.P.L. 1734. Relevance of previous planning decisions and consistency of decision making.
  • R (on the application of Megaclose Ltd) and East Midlands Technical Ltd v Nottingham City Council (CO/5207/06). Acted for claimants in judicial review of Supplementary Planning Document in respect of limits to student accommodation in city centre.
  • R (on the application of Davey) v Aylesbury District Council and Mentmore Towers Limited [2006] J.P.L.1075; [2005] EWCA Civ 1322. Housing enabling development and listed building consent.
  • R (on the application of Prophet) v York City Council [2003] EWCA Civ 1140. Approach to crime prevention in respect of housing development.
  • R (on the application of Rank) v East Cambridgeshire DC, [2002] EWHC 2081 (Admin); [2003] J.P.L. 454; [2002] 42 E.G. 159 (C.S.); (2002) 152 N.L.J. 1561. Relevance of previous planning housing decisions and consistency of decision making.
  • Coghurst Wood Leisure Park Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions [2002] EWHC 1091 (Admin); [2003] J.P.L. 206; [2002] 24 E.G. 145 (C.S.);[2002] N.P.C. 80.Estopel and legitimate expectation in respect of discharge of planning conditions in relation to holiday homes estate.
  • R (on the application of the Organisation for Promotion of Environmental Needs) v Tower Hamlets LBC [2008] EWHC 3053 (Admin). Judicial review in respect of grant of planning permission for tall building in East London.
  • Selby Coalfield: Gascoigne Woods - proposed redevelopment by UK Coal of Gascoigne wood inter modal rail and warehousing (2008).
  • Residential applications by Barratt York and Wilson Connolly Northern Ltd, land East of Low Street, South Milford, planning inspectorate ref: app/n2739/v/03/1132007 & 1132009, Call-in inquiry acted for the successful local planning authority, case raised issues concerning brownfield status of former greenhouses (2007).
  • Residential Planning Appeal by the Trustees of Size Check Ltd (site of Officer's Club) at Bassington Industrial Estate, Cramington, appeared at the public inquiry for Persimmon Homes (a third party objector) (2007).
  • Goldhawk Road, Hammersmith. Planning inquiry, section 78 planning appeal, promoted proposal for 10 storey residential development in conservation area (2007).
  • Planning inquiry into major residential redevelopment of former Scarborough Hospital, acted for the successful developer (2006).
  • Planning appeal for residential development of land South of Top Farm, Yew Tree Land, Elkesley, Retford, Appeal Refs: APP/A3010/A/06/2015280/NWF. Acted for local planning authority (Bassetlaw DC) successfully resisting appeal.
  • Riverside Mills, Leeds. Planning inquiry into major mixed office and residential redevelopment scheme in the Kirkstall Valley, acted for the successful local planning authority, Leeds City Council.

Retail, Business and Commercial

  • Re House of Fraser application No. [2010] NIQB 105 challenge to lawfulness of minister's refusal to require further environmental information under the EIA regulations in respect of proposed Sprucefield retail (John Lewis anchor store) development and challenge based on appearance of bias.
  • R (on the application of Cathco Property Holding Ltd) v Cygnor Gwynedd Council & Finneys Ltd [2008] EWHC 1462 (Admin). Acted for rival retail operator in judicial review of planning permission concerning correct interpretation of retail planning policy. Important guidance by court as to the contents and role of a planning officer's report to committee.
  • R (on the application of Weir) v Camden LBC [2005] EWHC 1875 (Admin) Commercial restaurant development. Failure to take into account a material consideration (i.e. objection from neighbouring council), whether the status of objector are relevant considerations.
  • R. v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC Ex p. CPRE London Branch (Leave to Appeal) (No.1) [2000] Env. L.R. 549; (2001) 81 P. & C.R. 7. Judicial review of the council's decision to grant outline planning consent and approval of reserved matters in respect of retail and leisure development for the Westgate Centre.
  • Planning inquiry into Coach Parking at the Emirates Stadium by Arsenal AFC (2009). Press Coverage: http://www.thecnj.com/islington/2009/073109/inews073109_01.html.
  • Application by UK Coal Mining Ltd for the retention and re-use of buildings, landscaping and infrastructure at former Riccall Mine, Selby Road, Riccall, York YO19 6QR (Planning inspectorate ref: app/n2739/a/06/2020337/nwf) (2008).
  • Acted for Norwich City Council in a successful defeat of Tesco planning appeal inquiry.
  • Hornsey Water Treatment Plant, acted for Thames Water Utilities in proposed extension to water treatment plant in Alexendra Palace Conservation Area to address increased bromate levels
  • See below in Northern Ireland section for retail work carried out in Northern Ireland.
  • Acting for John Lewis in respect of a series of sites including Waitrose Store at the site of the former Cherry Tree Pub, Bridge Road, Welwyn Garden City (2008) and Waitrose Store at Croydon (2010).

Development Plans and Core Strategies

See also under "Strategic Environmental Assessment" and "Northern Ireland" sections.

  • Appeared before the examination in public into the London Plan (2010)
  • Associated British Ports v Hampshire CC and others [2008] EWHC 1540 [2008] ALL ER (D) 83. Successfully acted for ABP in relation to Dibden Bay in high court challenge to Hampshire Mineral Core Strategy. One of the first successful high court challenges to examine the meaning of "soundness". Plan held to fail ‘soundness' test of PPG 12. Important high court guidance on the new time period for bringing challenges to development plans.
  • Fairfield Partnership v Huntingdon and Persimmon [2003] EWHC 2430 (Admin) [2004] JP.L. 1719. Acted for Persimmon in successfully resisting challenge to adoption of development plan.
  • Stannifer Developments Limited v Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council CO/6546/2003. Acted for local authorities in successfully resisting high court challenge to the adoption of Structure Plan. (2004).
  • Northstowe Area Action Plan South Cambridge DPP, appeared for Cambridgeshire County Council at one of the first hearings into an AAP. (2007).
  • Promoted the Cambridgeshire County Council and City of Peterborough Waste Local Plan (2002).
  • Promoted the Bedfordshire and Luton Waste and Minerals Local Plan (2003).
  • Appeared at London Plan Examination in Public objecting in relation to policies in London Plan in relation to River Thames and waste (2003) securing major amendments to London Plan in particular in connection with Blue Ribbon policies.
  • Promoted the Selby District Local Plan (2001).
  • Appeared for house builder in relation to objections to the Windsor and Maidenhead Local Plan (1997).

Wind farms

  • Enertrag (UK) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWHC 679 (Admin). Assessment of impact of wind farms in relation to PPG 15. (Press coverage http://www.planningresource.co.uk/news/ByDiscipline/Development-Control/897183/Norfolk-turbines-blocked/).
  • R (on the application of Newcastle International Airport Ltd) v Wansbeck District Council and Hainsford Energy Blyth Harbour (CO/9992/2008). Acted for wind farm operator defending the grant of planning permission for re-powering of wind turbines at Blyth Harbour.
  • Acted in the successful planning appeal by Hainsford Energy in respect of the re-powering of the wind farm at Caton Moor, Lancs.
  • Re London Array Windfarm. Acted for the Faversham Oyster Fishery Company objecting to impact of power cables upon ancient shell fishing and oyster rights on sea bed.

Enforcement and Listed Buildings

  • R. (on the application of Lady Hart of Chilton) v Babergh DC [2014] EWHC 3261 (Admin); [2015] J.P.L. 491 approach to substantial harm misapplication of the requirement to refer case to the secretary of state.
  • Acted for Islington London Borough Council at pubic inquiry in successfully defeating an appeal proposal for residential enabling development by the Resurrection Manifestations Church to redevelop the Grade II* listed Art Deco-style Carlton Cinema building in Essex Road, Islington. (Planning Inspectorate: Refs 2127802 etc)
  • R. (on the application of Garner) v Elmbridge BC [2011] EWHC 86 (Admin). Challenge to the Council's decision to permit the development including redevelopment of Hampton Court station on the grounds that it had failed to "have special regard" to preserving the setting of Hampton Court Palace as required by section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990, had failed to apply the sequential tests for development in a flood plain, set out in Planning Policy Statement 25 "Development and Flood Risk", and failed to give sufficient reasons for granting permission. Gregory acted for the successful developer Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd.
  • Bristol Park & Fly Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWHC 3236 (Admin) [2009] All ER (D) 267 (Nov). [2010] J.P.L. 929. (Press coverage http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Bristol-Airport-car-park-wins-court-battle-closure/article-1551724-detail/article.html). Challenge to enforcement appeal in relation to airport parking and the approach to temporary planning permissions.
  • Ardagh Glass Ltd v Chester City Council [2009] EWHC 745 (Admin); [2009] Env L.R. 34; [2009] N.P.C. 59. Case concerning mandatory requirement for local planning authority to take enforcement action in respect of largest glass manufacturing plant in Europe and lawfulness of retrospective planning permissions for EIA development.
  • Haringey LBC v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] EWHC 1201(Admin); [2008] WLR (D) 145. Successfully acted for Haringey LBC in challenge to grant of planning permission where inspector had made error of fact and breached the requirements of fairness. Important guidance given on the conduct of site inspections.
  • Aylesbury Vale DC v Florent [2007] EWHC 724 (QB); [2008] J.P.L. 70; (2007) 151 S.J.L.B. 505. Injunction enforcing noise planning conditions in respect of clay pigeon shoot business and impact of article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
  • Beach v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] EWHC Admin 381; [2002] J.P.L. 185. Treatment of mixed uses of land, some of which had subsisted for a period exceeding 10 years prior to the issue of an enforcement notice.
  • R v Elmbridge BC Ex p. Active Office Ltd (1998) 10 Admin. L.R. 561; (1998) 162 J.P.N. 828; (1998) 95(1) L.S.G. 24; Times, December 29, 1997. Enforcement notices; Listed buildings; Local authorities powers and duties; Prosecutions.
  • R v Sandhu (CA Criminal Division) [1997] The Times January 2. Listed building prosecution evidence in strict liability planning offences.

Planning and Human Rights

  • R (on the application of Adlard) v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions [2002] EWCA Civ 735; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2515; [2002] H.R.L.R. 37, whether obligation under article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights to hold oral hearing when granting planning permission contrary to development plan .
  • South Buckinghamshire DC v Porter (No.1) [2001] EWCA Civ 1549; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 1359; [2002] 1 All E.R. 425. Section 187b injunctions in respect of breaches of planning control by gypsies. Engagement of article 8 ECHR and proportionality.
  • R. (on the application of McCallion) v Kennet DC; [2001] EWHC Admin 575; [2002] P.L.C.R. 9. Whether alleged failure to consider objection a breach of article 6 of the ECHR.
  • R (on the application of Alconbury) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] UKHL 23; [2003] 2 A.C. 295; [2001] 2 W.L.R. 1389; [2001] 2 All E.R. 929. Whether pursuant to article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights a policy maker can also be a decision taker.

Green Belt and the Open Countryside

  • R. (on the application of Lee Valley Regional Park Authority) v Broxbourne BC successful challenge to grant of planning permission in green belt which erred in treating the whole site as PDL and misdirected itself to the approach to openness in Green Belt,.
  • Oxford University v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (ongoing). Challenge to South East Plan in respect of review of green belt boundaries and lack of proper SEA.
  • Enodis Plc v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] EWHC 2591 (Admin). Approach to enabling development in the green belt.
  • Bridgewood Rochester Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] EWHC 405 (Admin). Failure of decision maker to mention planning policy.
  • Doherty v First Secretary of State [2003] EWHC 2117 (Admin) Caravan sites; Green belt; Gypsies; Planning permission; Planning policy guidance; Schools.
  • Surrey Heath BC v Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions [2002] EWHC 58 (Admin). Polo enclosure in green belt and approach to fall-back position. Admissibility of late evidence.
  • Planning inquiry into appeal by Winchester Marine Limited against the decision of West Lindsay District Council to issue an enforcement notice relating to unauthorised storage on land at the former RAF Binbrook (used as location for Film Memphis Belle) now known as Binbrook Technical Park situated in Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Acted for Winchester Marine in successful appeal. Ref APP/N2535/C/08/2085832 (2009)
  • Bliss Gravel (2008) planning call-in inquiry into major executive residential housing as very special circumstances for inappropriate development in the green belt
  • ISKON v Hertsmere -appeared for the local planning authority at public inquiry successfully defeating proposal for what the Bucks Free Press described as "a massive cow shed" in the green belt . The buildings would have housed 44 sacred cows in the grounds of the Hare Krishna (or ISKON) Bhaktivedanta Manor in Aldenham. The Manor was purchased by former Beatle, George Harrision in 1973 who then gave it to ISKON.

Material Change of Use and Operational Development

  • Beach v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] EWHC Admin 381; [2002] J.P.L.185. Material change of use and enforcement notices.
  • R (on the application of Lowther) v Durham CC [2001] EWCA Civ 781; [2002] Env. L.R. 13; [2002] 1 P. & C.R. 22; [2001] 3 P.L.R. 83; [2002] J.P.L. 197; [2001] 22 E.G. 154 (C.S.); (2001) 98(23) L.S.G. 42; Times, June 22, 2001. Material change of use whether burning of hazardous waste in cement kiln as field amounted to material change of use.
  • Millington v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [1999] 3 P.L.R. 118; [2000] J.P.L. 297; [1999] E.G. 95 (C.S.); (1999) 96(27) L.S.G. 35; [1999] N.P.C. 75; Times, June 29, 1999. Whether change of use; agricultural purposes; use of land for growing grapes to produce wine; public visits to site to buy wine; development of land.
  • Stilwell v First Secretary of State [2003] EWHC 2854 (Admin); Change of use; Nursing homes; Planning permission; Use classes order.
  • Planning inquiry into appeal by British Railways Residuary Body concerning demolition of Horspath, Oxfordshire and meaning of engineering operation. Acted for South Oxfordshire DC in successfully resisting appeal.

Section 106 Obligations

  • R (on the application of Lichfield Securities Ltd) v Lichfield DC; [2001] EWCA Civ 304; (2001) 3 L.G.L.R. 35; [2001] 3 P.L.R. 33; [2001] P.L.C.R. 32; [2001] J.P.L. 1434 Times, March 30, 2001; duty of local planning authority to consult third parties in respect of section 106 agreement.

Trees

  • Wilkson Properties Ltd v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2010] EWHC 3274 (QB) Gregory acted for the successful claimant property company owned premises at which a London Plane tree was growing. Under the Council's procedures, TPOs were issued in the first instance by the Council's arboricultural officer and were then confirmed by the elected members after the subject of the order had had an opportunity to raise objections. The Council had served a TPO on the claimant in respect of the tree, and the members voted to confirm it at a meeting of its Planning Applications Committee. At the meeting, the arboricultural officer was promoting the order and the claimant was objecting to it. The committee chairman announced that he had visited the site with the arboricultural officer (but not with representatives of the claimant) prior to the meeting. Deputy High Court Judge Fraser held that objections had to be considered in an ‘open and even-handed manner' (at [78]). The confirmation of the TPO was quashed.

Motor Sports etc

  • BBC TOP GEAR: Successfully acted at public inquiry for the owners of Dunsfold Airfield where BBC Top Gear filmed in obtaining relaxation of filming conditions in respect of car and aeroplanes at the site. For further motor sports nuisance cases see "Environment" section.

Outdoor Advertisements

Gregory is regularly invited to address the Association of Outdoor Advertisers and has appeared in numerous advertisement appeal hearings and criminal prosecutions before the Magistrates' and Crown Courts.

  • London and Bath Estates v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2009] EWHC 3181 (Admin). Advertising enforcement notices and visual amenity.
  • R (on the application of Blow Up Media UK Ltd) v Lambeth LBC [2008] EWHC 1912 (Admin); [2009] 1 P. & C.R. 10. Advertisement control; Delegation; Enforcement; Local authorities' powers and duties; Local government officers; Proportionality; Protection of property; Sub-delegation.
  • R (on the application of Van Wagner) v London Borough of Southwark (CO 745/2004) Judicial review of local authority decision to issue section 11 notice under London Local Authorities Act.
  • JC Decaux Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2003] EWHC 407 (Admin); [2003] J.P.L. 1567. Advertisements; Material considerations; Planning inspectors; Reasons; Regional planning guidance.
  • Hertsmere BC v Reid Estates Ltd (2001) 81 P. & C.R. 16; [2001] J.P.L. 336; [2001] A.C.D. 22; [2001] A.C.D. 134; [2000] E.G. 74 (C.S.); (2000) 97(25) L.S.G. 42; Justices' decision flawed as it focused on the reasonableness of the steps taken to clean the advertisement, rather than the requirement that the advertisement be clean to the satisfaction of the local planning authority (see Sch. 1 Para. 1 of the 1992 Regulations).
  • O'Brien v Hertsmere BC (1998) 10 Admin. L.R. 445; (1998) 76 P. & C.R. 441; (1998) 162 J.P.N. 685. Advertisements; continued display pending appeal against conviction under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.224(3); whether appeal precluded conviction for continuing offence.
  • R v O'Brien and Hertsmere BC (1997) 74 P. & C.R. 264. Display of advertisement without consent; burden of proof.

Planning Judicial Reviews before the Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland)

  • Friends of the Earth Ltd's Application for Judicial Review, Re [2017] NICA 41 - failure to take effective enforcement action in respect of unlawful sand extraction in breach of EIA and Habitats Directives.
  • Re SOS (NI) Ltd application [2003] NICA 15; [2003] NIJB. Judicial review challenge to planning permission granted for residential development at Dundonald, Belfast.
  • Re Seaport Investments Limited application (Seaport No 1). Judicial review challenge on the compatibility of Northern lreland town and country plan making system with the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive questions referred in 2009 by Court of Appeal to the European Court of Justice.

Planning Judicial Reviews before the High Court (Northern Ireland)

  • Irwin's Application for Judicial Review, Re [2017] NIQB 75 whether case in respect of permitted development relating to exploratory drilling rendered academic.
  •  Friends of the Earth Ltd's Application for Judicial Review, Re [2016] NIQB 91 failure to take effective enforcement action in respect of unlawful sand extraction in breach of EIA and Habitats Directives.
  •  Alternative A5 Alliance's Application for Judicial Review, Re [2013] NIQB 30; [2014] N.I. 96; A5 dualling scheme. Breach of habitats and SEA directive
  •  Alternative A5 Alliance's Application for Judicial Review, Re [2012] NIQB 97 protective costs order.
  •  Re House of Fraser application [2010] NIQB 105 challenge to lawfulness of minister's refusal to require further environmental information under the EIA regulations in respect of proposed Sprucefield retail development and challenge based on appearance bias.
    http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/2CD1DF16-2CF3-4D4A-AA1E-410D9BD00037/0/j_j_GIR7962Final.htm
  •  Re CALNI application. Judicial review challenge to decision to approve Rose Energy's chicken waste incinerator at Glenavy without holding public inquiry into the planning application. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11421505
  •  Re Seaport Investments Limited application (Seaport No 1) [2007] NIQB 62; [2008] Env. L.R. 23 (re Judicial review challenge to compatibility of Northern Ireland town and country plan making system with the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive) and whether environmental report accompanying draft plan complied with SEA (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2004.
  •  Re Seaport (NI) Limited application (Seaport No 2) Judicial review challenge as to whether open to the Department for the Environment to declare it "non feasible" for development plan to comply with SEA Directive high court (Weatherup J) referred series of question to the European Court of Justice (ongoing).
  •  Re Seaport (NI) Limited (Seaport No3) (January 2009) (Weatherup J) judicial review challenge to decision by minister not to conjoin planning applications and require PAC hearing in respect of new tourist centre at the Giant's Causeway http://www.colerainetimes.co.uk/news/Sweeney-takes-Causeway-case-to.4869...
  • Re Murdock Group Limited - application for judicial review challenging Newry Plan (2008)
  • Re Irwin Glenbank Limited - application for judicial review challenging Craigavon Town Centre Boundaries and Retail Designations Plan 2010 (2008 No 7281/01) (judicial review of the decisions of the Department of the Environment (Northern Ireland) taken on the 30th June 2008 to adopt the Craigavon Town Centre Boundaries and Retail Designations Plan 2010).
  • Re Vico Kent Limited - application for judicial review challenging Craigavon Town Centre Boundaries and Retail Designations Plan 2010.
  • Re Irwin Glenbank Limited - application for judicial review challenging retail planning permission granted to Turkington (2009). Judicial review of decisions of the Department of the Environment taken on the 12th November 2008 to grant J. H. Turkington & Sons Limited planning permission for a superstore with associated car parking and petrol filling station.

Publications on Planning Include:

  • Jones & A. Graham Paul: 'The Community Infrastructure Levy: how it will operate in practice' [2009] JPL 1267-1282.
  • Jones: 'Strategic Environmental Assessment: The Seaport Investments case' (2008) 20 ELM 5 282.
  • McCracken & Jones: 'Article 8 ECHR, gypsies, and some remaining problems after South Buckinghamshire' [2003] JPL 382.
  • Jones & Pike: 'Proportionality and planning - a difficult and nice point to be decided' [2002] J.P.L.908.
  • Jones & Phillpot: 'When he Who Hesitates is Lost: Judicial Review of Planning Permissions' [2000] JPL 564: R (oao Burkett) v Hammersmith LBC [2002] UKHL per Lord Steyn [41], [44],[49],[53]) and also cited and approved by Sykes J at para 107 of The Northern Jamaica Conservation Association and others v The Nature Resources Conservation Authority and the National Environmental and Planning Agency (Claim HCV 3022 of 2005) per Sykes J.
  • Jones & Honey: 'Ex parte Beresford: further comment' R.W.L.R. 2004, Sep (15.3), 67-70.
  • Jones & Meah: 'When is a house not a house?' S.J. 2003, 147(22), 642-644.
  • Jones & Rai: 'Part of the plan.'S.J. 2003, 147(18), 530-531.
  • Jones & Waite: 'How soon is too late? SJ 2002, 146(29), 688-689.
  • Jones & Abrahams: 'Grampian and British Railways Board revisited - the use of negative pre-conditions in circumstances of uncertainty' [2001] J.P.L. 2001.
  • Jones & Beck: 'Implied licence v. public use as of right' R.W.L.R. 2001, Nov (15.3), 29-32
  • Jones: 'Planning for trees' S.J. 1999, 143(38), 937.
  • Jones: 'Town and Country Planning (Cost of Inquiries etc) Act 1995' S.J. 1995, 139(48), 1263.