Holmes & Hills’ Planning Law Department secures outcome in CAAD appeal cost decision

In a decision by the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on 24 October 2024, Holmes & Hills has successfully represented Mr. Mohammed Bashir in a cost ruling within a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development (CAAD) appeal. The case, Bashir v London Borough of Newham [2024] UKUT 146 (LC), marks the first time the Upper Tribunal has considered costs under the amended rule 10(6)(aa) of its Procedure Rules, underscoring the firm’s niche expertise in Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPO) and Development Consent Orders (DCO). The case showcases Holmes & Hills’ capacity to deliver successful outcomes in contentious planning and development cases.

Overview of the case

The matter occurred from a CAAD appeal in which the appellant, Mr. Bashir, contested the London Borough of Newham’s refusal to issue a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development related to property that was subject to compulsory acquisition. Mr Bashir’s appeal was successful and a CAAD was issued. However, this appeal became even more significant as the Upper Tribunal was asked to consider a costs application for the first time under new Procedural Rules amended following a 2021 Court of Appeal decision.

Decision and complexities

The Acquiring Authority (London Borough of Newham) sought its costs in the CAAD appeal from 16 November 2023 on the basis that on that date Newham amended its case to allow for some form of appropriate alternative development on Mr Bashir’s land and, thereafter, it [Newham] had been the successful party either outright or on a number of discrete issues/points.

The Tribunal rejected Newham’s attempt to recover the entirety of its costs from 16 November 2023. In interpreting rule 10(6)(aa), the Tribunal clarified that an issues-based cost order in CAAD appeals should only be made under “exceptional” circumstances and that there was no doubt in the Tribunal’s mind that Mr Bashir was “really to be regarded as the successful party”.

This decision clarifies cost recovery rights in CAAD appeals and provides a foundational interpretation of the Tribunal’s revised procedural rules.

Holmes & Hills’ Compulsory Purchase and Development Consent Division, led by Partner Michael Harman, leveraged their niche expertise to secure a favourable outcome for Mr. Bashir, with the possibility of recovering significant costs from that Acquiring Authority in respect of the CAAD and compulsory acquisition of his land. This success not only underscores the firm’s strength in dealing with complex planning law and compulsory purchase matters but also successfully managing formal proceedings before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal’s decision affirms that Mr. Bashir was the successful party in the CAAD appeal but also highlights Holmes & Hills’ growing reputation in compulsory purchase matters alongside its established planning law expertise.