"He is an excellent advocate".
"He's got a special talent for how cases ought to be presented to the tribunal".
Chambers and Partners 2017
"He is convincing in his arguments and has an excellent tribunal manner".
Legal 500 2017
"He knows the subject matter inside out and is incredibly eloquent".
"He's incredibly intelligent."
"He is really sharp-witted and very good strategically".
Chambers and Partners 2018
Richard's long standing experience in compulsory purchase compensation forms another arm to his significant practice in the Lands Chamber, Upper Tribunal.
He acts both for claimants and acquiring authorities. Claimant clients include Minerva, Glaxo Smith Kline, Iceland Foods (at a number of locations), New Look, Optical Express (in the case that materially altered the approach to compensation for business loss) and others.
He acted for the North West Development Agency in respect of all claims for compensation on the compulsory purchase of the Ancoats area of Manchester. Recently, he has acted for the LDA (and subsequently the GLA) and TfL in respect of about twenty multi-million pound compensation claims arising out of the acquisition of land under the Olympic and Crossrail schemes. They include:
- Dominion Mosaic & Tile Co. v. GLA - a complex claim for a very significant sum, the most controversial being the alleged development value of the extensive site in the absence of compulsory acquisition.
- Haringey Meat Traders v. GLA - this case involved three pieces of litigation all relating to the acquisition of a substantial industrial building opposite Stratford International Station. First, there was a section 18 inquiry at which the claimant's arguments were rejected. Then, there was High Court litigation in which the claimant unsuccessfully challenged the Secretary of State's conclusion on the section 18 inquiry. Finally, there was a decision of the Upper Tribunal upholding the GLA's case that the claim had been made after the end of the limitation period.
- Overseas Plastics v. GLA - another case in which Richard successfully persuaded the Upper Tribunal that a claim had been made out of time.
- Land Regal v. GLA - another long running piece of litigation that started with a section 18 inquiry in which the GLA, for whom Richard acted, successfully achieved a narrow certificate in relation to a large mill building. There followed a claim in the Upper Tribunal (which the claimant ultimately settled at the last minute) on a number of issues - notably, the rule 2 value of the land.
- BE Wedges v. GLA - a very complex and deeply forensic claim alleging very substantial loss of profits both at the galvanising plant acquired and at other plants within the group. After the exchange of skeleton arguments, the claimant accepted the sealed offer.
- Gray's Waste v. TfL - a complex loss of profits claim that flowed from the allegation that the acquisition of the site for Crossrail prevented the claimant from entering into a new and lucrative recycling business. The claim raised interesting forensic questions and fundamental issues about causation. This was another case in which, late in the process of preparation, the claimant accepted the Acquiring Authority's offer.
- William Hill v. TfL - an interesting decision of the Upper Tribunal on the scope of its powers to allow the substitution of parties after the end of the limitation period.
- Great Western Studios v. TfL - case which raised a number of issues both on the rule 2 valuation of the former Paddington Lost Property Office (subsequently licensed out as artists' studios) and on the ability to claim costs of refurbishing replacement premises. The claim settled before hearing.
- S. Evans & Son v. Halton BC - a claim arising out of the acquisition of a sizeable scrap metal yard for the Mersey Gateway Bridge. The issues included rule 2 valuation and a very large claim (involving significant factual and accountancy issues) for the loss of the scrap metal business. Richard acted for the Acquiring Authority, including at a successful mediation.