Armin has a busy planning practice and advises on the full gamut of planning issues. He is ranked amongst the leading planning barristers under the age of 35 by Planning Magazine’s Planning Law Survey 2025 (and was recognised as such in his first year of practice). 

He also serves as a part time secondee to Westminster City Council as in-house counsel, advising on contentious and complex planning matters and judicial reviews. He was formerly the Judicial Assistant to Sir Keith Lindblom, the Senior President of Tribunals, at the Court of Appeal, and worked with Sir Keith almost exclusively on appeals concerning planning law. 

A sample of Armin’s planning instructions includes the following:

• Acting as sole counsel at a two-day planning appeal hearing concerning housing land supply and landscape issues
• Acting as junior counsel to Saira Kabir Sheikh KC in a two week planning inquiry dealing with issues of transport modelling and landscape issues for a major warehouse project
• Acting as junior counsel to Mark Westmoreland-Smith KC in a significant planning court claim concerning EIA assessment and the Gateshead principle at the UK’s largest port facility
• Drafting a pre-action protocol letter and SFG on behalf of a local authority in a CIL claim concerning nearly £1mn in unpaid CIL 
• Advising a local authority on the scope of the Hillside principle and the lawfulness of interim uses in relation to a high-value commercial development 
• Advising on proposed judicial review challenges of PINS decisions relating to failures in EIA assessment and failures relating to the Habitats Regulations
• Advising on numerous s187B planning injunctions, the balance of convenience, and the procedural requirements for committal orders
• Advising on multiple applications to amend planning permissions by way of s73 and s96A, both in residential and commercial development
• Advising on multiple proposals to change the use of land, CLEUDs and CLOPUDs, in relation to a high-value hotel chain development
• Advising on the scope of a “fallback” position and the principle of consistency in decision-making in relation to judicial review of a householder permission 
• Advising a local authority on Article 4 directions and their consultation requirements with regards a proposal to permit specified development across a large portion of the borough
• Multiple plea in mitigations in planning enforcement prosecutions relating to the changing of windows in a conservation area, resulting in each case in minimal fines despite several years of breach

As the Judicial Assistant to Sir Keith Lindblom at the Court of Appeal (2022/2023), Armin worked on some of the most significant planning cases of recent years:

• Persimmon Homes (Thames Valley) Ltd v Worthing Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 762 – on the correct approach to giving “great weight” to development in the setting of AONBs, and whether the Inspector had failed to consider the emerging plan.
• R (oao) Save Britain's Heritage v Davies [2023] EWCA Civ 723 – on the scope of Class B permitted development rights to demolish buildings.
• Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 727 – Whether the 1990 Act’s prohibition on planning enforcement against Crown land prevented an LPA from applying for an injunction to prevent the change of use of a military barracks as asylum seeker accommodation.
• Kazalbash v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing And Communities [2023] EWCA Civ 904 – Whether an Inspector had taken an irrational approach to assessing the harms of a proposal on an area’s character and appearance.
• Devine v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2023] EWCA Civ 601- Whether an inspector was right to find that an unpermitted development had not been “substantially completed” in a ground (d) s.174 enforcement appeal, and the correct approach to the decision in Sage v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2003] 1 WLR 983
• East Quayside 12 LLP v The Council of the City of Newcastle Upon Tyne [2023] EWCA Civ 359 – Whether an Inspector had taken a lawful approach, and given proper reasons, in assessing heritage harm to a grade I listed building.
• CAB Housing Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 194 – on the correct approach to prior approval under Class AA of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the GPDO (right to add additional stories to dwellinghouses).
• R (oao) Whitley Parish Council v North Yorkshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 92 - Whether a planning officer had fettered the discretion of their committee by advising that they were not permitted to give any weight to a policy requiring that a proposal be the “Best Practicable Environmental Option” for pulverised fuel ash disposal.
• R (oao) Braithwaite And Melton Meadows Properties Ltd v East Suffolk Council [2022] EWCA Civ 1716 – On whether a CIL charge was invalidated by an LPA’s failure to serve a liability notice in good time, the true date at which time for making a judicial review claim expired, and the interpretation of Regulation 65 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.

Armin has been involved in a number of significant judicial review claims and statutory challenges, on behalf of both claimants and public authorities. He is a member of the Attorney General’s ‘Junior’ Junior Scheme. During his pupillage, Armin was supervised by Richard Honey KC, and assisted with a number of significant public law cases, including R (Parkes) v Dorset Council & Ors [2024] EWHC 1253 (Admin).

He also previously served as the Judicial Assistant to the Senior President of Tribunals at the Court of Appeal, assisting on a number of the leading public law appellate cases of 2023/2024. 

Armin currently serves as a part-time secondee to Westminster City Council, where he regularly advises on and assists with a range of judicial review matters, including the preparation of pre-action protocol letters to defend the Council from challenge. 

Armin’s experience in public law litigation includes:

• Instructed as sole counsel for the claimant landowner in a statutory challenge (under s.23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981) to the confirmation of the Blackpool Borough Council (Multiversity) Compulsory Purchase Order 2024, a £65 million regeneration scheme.
• Junior counsel for the claimant landowner, led by Gregory Jones KC, in a statutory challenge (under s.23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981) to the confirmation of the London Borough of Newham (James Riley Point) Compulsory Purchase Order 2023, a £78 million regeneration scheme.
• Junior counsel for the Secretary of State for Transport, led by Mark Westmoreland-Smith KC, defending a judicial review of the decision to confirm the Development Consent Order relating to the Immingham Eastern Ro-Ro Terminal, concerning the UK’s largest port facility. 
• Junior counsel for the Secretary of State for Transport and HS2 Limited, led by Charles Streeten, successfully defending a judicial review of DfT’s refusal to grant a private lease to property acquired for the HS2 project (R (Holohan) v Secretary of State for Transport and HS2 Ltd [2025] EWHC 23 (Admin))
• Defending the Secretary of State for the Home Department in various immigration related judicial reviews, including a significant challenge to the ECHR compatibility of Home Office policy in relation to detention. 

As a Judicial Assistant at the Court of Appeal, Armin assisted with the following matters:

• R. (Friends of the Earth v SSIT/UKEF [2023] EWCA Civ 14 – A landmark challenge to the government’s investment in foreign LNG projects, concerning the extent to which the Secretary of State had to comply with the Paris Climate Agreement, the rationality of their determination that the investment was Paris compliant, and whether the Tameside duty required the SoS to make a quantitative assessment of Scope 3 emissions.
• R. (The Spitalfields Historic Building Trust) v London Borough Of Tower Hamlets [2023] EWCA Civ 917 – on the scope of a local authority’s power to restrict councillor participation in meetings by standing orders, under Schedule 12 to the Local Government Act 1972. 
• Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 727 – Whether the 1990 Act’s prohibition on planning enforcement against Crown land prevented an LPA from applying for an injunction to prevent the change of use of a military barracks as asylum seeker accommodation.
• R (oao) Braithwaite And Melton Meadows Properties Ltd v East Suffolk Council [2022] EWCA Civ 1716 – Whether a public decision-makers failure to serve a CIL liability notice on time rendered it legally invalid, and the date at which time for making a judicial review claim expired where previous decisions became legal nullities. 

Armin is developing a busy licensing practice. He is frequently instructed to appear against leading barristers in the field, and has succeeded in a range of licensing hearings, including before the Old Bailey. The following are notable successes:

• Revocation of a nightclub licence on summary review (Concept Club, Mayfair), as reported in national media here and by the Institute of Licensing here.
• Revocation of a nightclub licence on standard review (Smade Lounge, Ilford)
• Revocation of a cocktail bar’s licence on summary review (Stack Bar, Ealing)
• Suspension of a nightclub licence as an interim step on summary review (Louche Soho), as reported in the media here.
• Refusal of an application to vary the hours of a nightclub (Arcadia Club, Bexley);
• Counter-notice to multiple TENs applications for a nightclub (Smade Lounge);
• Refusal of an application to transfer a licence, change DPS, and lift interim suspension (Club 701, Southwark);
• Refusal of an application for a new restaurant/club licence (Cabana LDN, Ilford);
• Reinstatement of a revoked taxi licence on appeal to the Crown Court, despite the driver’s conviction under the Equality Act for refusing to carry an assistance dog; and
• Multiple reinstatements of revoked taxi licences on appeal to the Magistrates’ Court, including a case concerning allegations of sexual assault.

Armin has given formal written advice regarding the Late Night Levy in his own right. He also assisted in the preparation of an advice concerning the lawfulness of a local authority’s proposed procedures for licensing hearings. He has drafted research notes on procedural fairness in pavement licensing, and on the legal relationship between statutory guidance and legislation in the context of dog day-care licensing. He has also made submissions on the extent to which GDPR can justify an operator's refusal to hand CCTV recordings to the police. 

Beginning in January 2025, Armin will be seconded on a part-time basis to Westminster City Council's licensing subcommittee, serving as their legal adviser. 

Armin is regularly instructed in relation to issues concerning Highways and Open Spaces. A sample of his recent instructions includes:

• Drafting a pre-action protocol letter resisting a judicial review claim against the making of a coastal path under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009;
• Advising DEFRA in relation to a series of issues concerning the registration of common land under the Commons Act 2006;
• Advising a local authority as to consultation requirements the legal significance of a failure to comply with a procedural requirement relating to a stopping up order made under section 257 of the 1990 Act; 
• Advising a local authority as to whether a PROW had been dedicated under the Highways Act 1980, particularly on evidential issues with regards to sufficiency of challenge and the date of challenge;
• Advising a local amenity group in relation to a judicial review of a local authority's refusal to register land as a TVG;
• Advising as to whether travel restrictions arising from the COVID-19 regulations constituted a material interruption with regards to the prescription of public rights of way; and
• Advising as to whether a PINS advice note regarding the prescription of public rights of way was an accurate statement of the law.

Armin has a growing compulsory purchase and compensation practice. It is a key area of professional interest. 

He has developed a particular specialism in litigating statutory challenges to CPOs brought under section 23 of the Acquisition of Land Act. His instructions, both as sole and junior counsel, include:

• In the widely reported case of Saravanamuthu v Secretary of State for Communities, Housing and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWHC 2132 (Admin), as junior to Gregory Jones KC. 
• In a challenge to the Blackpool Borough Council (Multiversity) Compulsory Purchase Order 2024, a £65 million regeneration scheme, involving issues of procedural fairness. This was ultimately settled out of court;
• In a challenge to the London Borough of Ealing (Green Man Lane Estate Phase 4 West Ealing W13) Compulsory Purchase Order 2024, involving issues of procedural non-compliance, as junior to Michael Fry.  

Armin’s experience also embraces disputed compensation matters. He was instructed as junior counsel to James Pereira KC in two multimillion-pound compensation claims in the Upper Tribunal relating to the diminution of land value caused by the erection of power lines.

As a pupil, during his supervision by Richard Honey KC and Hugh Flanagan, he drafted statements of case and conducted research into matters like the Pointe Gourde principle and the significance of the Castlefield decision in respect of post valuation date events, and prepared a research note in respect of proposed changes to the Upper Tribunal Lands Chamber rules, which was appended to the report on the changes prepared by the Deputy President, Martin Rodger KC. 

Armin has a passionate interest in environmental law, and gained substantial experience in the field during his pupillage, particularly under the supervision of Richard Honey KC.

His experience includes:

• Drafting a pre-action protocol letter on the extent to which mitigation can be relied on in EIA screening opinions, and the proper approach to assessing cumulative environmental impacts
• Assisting in drafting an advice as to whether the Environment Agency owed a duty of care to a claimant who had been impacted by pollutants from their floodworks, and whether such a claim was out of time.
• Preparing a research note to inform a lecture on nutrient neutrality and the likely consequences for housebuilding, in light of the Dutch Nitrogen case.
• Drafting an advice as to a governmental department’s compliance with the requirements of the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022.
• Preparing a research note on the legal principles governing screening opinions in EIA assessment.

Armin is a frequent contributor to FTB’s Environmental Law Blog. He has written on the environmental implications of the government’s new infrastructure policies, judicial reviews against the adoption of Carbon Budgets, and on sewerage and water law.

Armin has also been published academically, in the Journal of Water Law, on the significance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Manchester Ship Canal v United Utilities Water for private nuisance claims relating to the pollution of rivers. The article is available here.

As a Judicial Assistant in the Court of Appeal, Armin assisted with the following environmental law cases:

• R. (Friends of the Earth v SSIT/UKEF [2023] EWCA Civ 14 – A landmark challenge to the government’s investment in foreign LNG projects, concerning the extent to which the Secretary of State had to comply with the Paris Climate Agreement, the rationality of their determination that the investment was Paris compliant, and whether the Tameside duty required the SoS to make a quantitative assessment of Scope 3 emissions. Armin is also a regular contributor to FTB’s Environmental Law Blog, and in addition, . He has written the following:
• R. (Global Feedback Ltd) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1549 – on the scope of the Secretary of State’s duty to prepare a Carbon Budget under section 13(1) of the Climate Change Act 2008
• R (oao) Whitley Parish Council v North Yorkshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 92 - Whether a planning officer had fettered the discretion of their committee by advising that they were not permitted to give any weight to a policy requiring that a proposal be the “Best Practicable Environmental Option” for pulverised fuel ash disposal.

Armin is keenly interested in rating and council tax law. He gained valuable experience in the field as a pupil during his supervision by Hugh Flanagan.

Armin's recent experience includes:

• Drafting a skeleton argument in an appeal to the High Court as to whether the applicant was entitled to a Class K student exemption from council tax
• Drafting an advice as to whether rooms within a telecommunications exchange constituted separate hereditaments that could be added to the central list
• Drafting an advice note as to whether contractual options should influence the valuation of rateable land

Armin has considerable DCO experience, particularly in acting for developers promoting schemes, and in defending approved schemes from judicial review challenge. 

Armin's experience includes:

• As a pupil, Armin worked with Andrew Tait KC and Isabella Tafur on behalf of National Highways on the Lower Thames Crossing DCO, among the largest and most contentious infrastructure projects in UK history. Armin attended nearly every hearing relating to the LTC and worked alongside the National Highways team in preparing evidence and responding to challenge from objecting local authorities and campaign groups.  
• As Isabella's pupil, Armin also assisted with her role in the examination into the DCO for the Immingham Port ‘Ro-Ro’ facility, which involved a major expansion of the UK's largest shipping port. Armin attended a series of Issue Specific Hearings, primarily related to EIA and navigational safety.
• Subsequently, Armin was instructed by the Secretary of State for Transport, as junior to Mark Westmoreland-Smith KC, to defend the decision to grant the Immingham Ro-Ro DCO, against a judicial review challenge brought by a rival commercial operator. The challenge related to EIA matters and an accusation of bias. The Secretary of State was successful on all grounds and permission to appeal was refused.  
• Armin also acted as junior counsel to Saira Kabir-Sheikh KC, acting for National Grid Plc in their application for a Development Consent Order relating to the ‘Sea Link’ project, one of the most significant upgrades to the UK’s energy infrastructure of recent years. Armin assisted in particular in scrutinising a wealth of EIA evidence supporting the application to ensure it was legally robust and would withstand legal challenge. 

As the Judicial Assistant to Sir Keith Lindblom in the Court of Appeal, Armin assisted with Tidal Lagoon (Swansea Bay) Plc v SSBEIS [2022] EWCA Civ 1579, a significant appeal concerning the judicial review of a DCO to build a large hydropower station in Wales. Armin is therefore well-acquainted with all stages of litigation relating to DCO projects. 

• BPP - Bar Course (Dist.)
• BPP - Graduate Diploma in Law (Dist.)
• University College London (MA) - Legal and Political Theory (Dist.) 
• University of Cambridge (BA) - Political Philosophy - 2.i

• Lord Denning scholarship (Major scholarship)
• Lord Bowen Scholarship (Most prestigious GDL scholarship offered by Lincoln’s Inn)
• Career Commitment Scholarship, BPP
• Dean’s List, UCL (Recognised as amongst the most outstanding students across the university)
• Second Prize, Bar Council Law Reform Essay Competition 2021 - ‘I owe my soul to the graduate recruitment team: Rethinking penalty clauses in employment contracts’
• Best in Category (Access to Justice), vLex/Justis International Law and Technology Essay Competition 2020 - ‘Let justice be done though the overheads fall: How online courts promote access to justice.’
• Merchant-Fisher Academic Scholar, George Watson’s College (Full-fee scholarship and bursary, 2009-2015)

• Winner, Lincoln’s Inn Debating Shield, 2021/2022
• Finalist, Law Society Donald Dewar Schools Debating Tournament 2013
• Finalist, Auld Hoose Schools Debating Competition 2012
• Finalist (representing Scotland), Oxford International Schools Debating Tournament 2009

• Prior to commencing pupillage, Armin spent a year as the judicial assistant to Sir Keith Lindblom, the Senior President of Tribunals, at the Court of Appeal. Armin assisted exclusively with cases concerning planning, environmental, and local government law. These included some of the most significant cases of recent years, including R. (Friends of the Earth v SSIT/UKEF [2023] EWCA Civ 14, R. (The Spitalfields Historic Building Trust) v LB Tower Hamlets [2023] EWCA Civ 917, and Tidal Lagoon (Swansea Bay) Plc v SSBEIS [2022] EWCA Civ 1579. He also assisted with a number of cases concerning the lawfulness of planning decision letters and officer reports, and a major case concerning the proper interpretation of NPPF policies concerning National Parks and AONBs.
• His academic background is in political philosophy, which has prepared him well for matters concerning local and national governance.  

• ALBA
• PEBA
• UKELA