Contact clerking team

Download Paul's CV

Choose the Expertise to be included in the CV download:

Select all

Add to shortlist

Choose the Expertise to be included in the shortlist profile:

Select All

Privacy notice

Paul Stinchcombe KC

“Paul is astonishingly quick to identify the key issues and develop coherent and persuasive arguments. He combines his hardworking nature with outstanding intellect and is a pleasure to work with.” The Legal 500 2022

“Paul gives a case everything – completely focused and in command of his brief.” The Legal 500 2021

“Paul is a particularly persuasive advocate, brilliant in both cross-examination and submissions.” Chambers and Partners 2020

Paul was called to the Bar in 1985, building up a substantial practice in public, environmental and planning law before becoming an MP (1997-2005), during which time he served on the Home Affairs Select Committee, the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Joint Committee on House of Lords Reform. Since returning to the Bar in May 2005, Paul rapidly rebuilt his practice and was elevated to silk within six years. Paul acts for developers, local authorities and private clients, including local campaign groups. Paul is regularly recommended in the legal directories and was named as The Times Lawyer of the week following his successful challenge against a decision to redevelop the house in which Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote The Hound of the Baskervilles. Paul was shortlisted for “Real Estate, Environmental and Planning Silk of the Year” at The Legal 500 UK Bar Awards 2018 and, in 2005, was elected as a Visiting Fellow to Cambridge University’s Centre of Public Law.

Areas of expertise

Planning

Paul has an extensive practice in planning law, including major infrastructure and development consent orders, compulsory purchase and compensation. He acts for a wide range of developers, as well as local authorities and campaigning groups, in relation to all forms of development, including housing and affordable housing, new settlements, retail, industrial and commercial development, and aviation. Paul regularly appears at public inquiries and hearings, local plan examinations and in the courts in these areas.

-- Art and Cultural Property

Paul has considerable experience in advising and appearing in cases raising heritage and cultural issues, both at Inquiry and in the court. These included two judicial reviews to protect the listed house in which Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote The Hound of the Baskervilles, the first of which was described by English Heritage as “the principal case law on the question of optimal viable use” in respect of heritage assets and saw Paul named ‘Lawyer of the Week’ in The Times.

Cases of note

  • R (Gibson) v Waverley Borough Council [2012] EWHC 1472 (Admin) - the first Conan Doyle case, described by English Heritage as “the principal case law on the question of optimal viable use” in respect of heritage assets, for which Paul named ‘Lawyer of the Week’ in The Times.
  • R (Gibson) v Waverley Borough Council [2015] EWHC 3784 (Admin) - the second Conan Doyle case concerning the question of “optimal viable use” in respect of heritage assets. 
  • R (Government of the Republic of France) v Kensington and Chelsea RLBC [2017] 1 WLR 320 - acting for the French government in a case concerning the concerning the scope of certificates of lawfulness under section 191 and 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and section 26H of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

-- Aviation and Aerospace

Having represented Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE) in a 49-day 2007 inquiry resisting an increase in the passenger cap at the airport, Paul represented them again in the 30-day 2021 inquiry fighting yet further expansion. Paul has also appeared for SSE in three leading High Court cases, on issues as diverse as apparent bias and the interplay between the development consent order (DCO) regime and traditional planning. Paul recently led Richard Wald QC and Gethin Thomas in the successful challenge to the grant of a DCO re-opening Manston Airport, and is currently acting for Eastleigh Borough Council, leading Ned Helme and Catherine Dobson, resisting an application for judicial review of the council’s decision to permit an extension to the runway of Southampton Airport.

Cases of note

  • R (GOESA Ltd.) v Eastleigh Borough Council and Southampton International Airport [2022] EWHC 1221 - resisting a judicial review of the council’s decision to permit the extension of the runway at Southampton airport in a leading case concerning the environmental impact assessment of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. 
  • R (on the application of Jennifer Dawes) v Secretary of State for Transport and Anor) (CO/2917/2020) - quashing the grant of a development consent order approving the re-opening of Manston Airport, on the Isle of Thanet in Kent, as a dedicated freight airport – the first successful challenge to a DCO for a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project since the introduction of the Planning Act 2008.
  • R (Ross & Sanders acting on behalf of Stop Stansted Expansion) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWHC 226 (Admin) - concerning the interplay between the development consent order regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) and the conventional planning regime.
  • R (1) Peter Sanders (2) Brian Ross) v (1) Airports Commission (2) Secretary of State for Transport [2013] EWHC3754 (Admin) - a challenge to the Airports Commission on the grounds of apparent bias.

-- Compulsory Purchase and Compensation

Paul both promotes and resists Compulsory Purchase Orders, and acts in the Upper Tribunal on compensation cases (including successfully resisting a £90m claim on behalf of the Welsh Ministers) and in related High Court cases.

Cases of note

  • Bishopsgate Parking and Powerfocal v The Welsh Ministers [2012] UKUT 22 (LC) - where Paul successfully represented the Welsh Ministers in a £90m Lands Tribunal claim following a compulsory acquisition of land in Cardiff city centre.
  • Thomas v Bridgend County Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 862 - concerning the application of the Human Rights Act to the Acquisition of Land Act.
  • O’Connor v Wiltshire County Council [2007] EWCA Civ 426, another case concerning the application of the Human Rights Act to the Acquisition of Land Act.
  • Ocean Leisure Ltd v Westminster City Council [2004] EWCA Civ 970 - a leading compensation case involving claims for loss caused to a business by hoardings obstructing the highway.
  • Wildtree Hotels Ltd v Harrow London Borough Council [2001] 2 AC 1 - another leading compensation case involving claims for loss caused to a business, this time by noise and dust.

-- Development Consent Orders and Infrastructure

Paul has considerable experience of infrastructure both within and outside the development consent order process, including proposals for aviation infrastructure and strategic rail freight interchanges.

Cases of note

  • R (Ross & Sanders acting on behalf of Stop Stansted Expansion) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWHC 226 (Admin) - concerning the interplay between the development consent order regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects and the conventional planning regime.
  • R (on the application of Jennifer Dawes) v Secretary of State for Transport and Anor) (CO/2917/2020) - quashing the grant of a development consent order approving the re-opening of Manston Airport, on the Isle of Thanet in Kent, as a dedicated freight airport – the first successful challenge to a DCO for a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project since the introduction of the Planning Act 2008.
  • St Albans DC v SSCLG & Ors [2015] EWHC 655 (Admin) - challenging the decision to grant permission for a strategic rail freight interchange, the largest inappropriate green belt development in the country. 

-- High Court Planning Challenges

Paul regularly appears in leading planning cases in the higher courts, including winning the seminal case of Hunston Properties, which established a new planning industry (not to mention the ultimate adoption of the ‘standard methodology’) regarding the objective assessment of housing needs when a council had an out-of-date local plan.

Cases of note

  • R (Save St Albans Green Belt and Others) v (1) St Albans City and District Council and (2) Hunston Properties Limited [2022] EWHC 2087 (Admin) - having won Hunston Properties Limited v (1) Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and (2) St Albans City and District Council [2013] EWCA Civ 1610 almost 10 years ago, the seminal case on “objectively assessed needs”, Paul returned to familiar territory, successfully defending the grant of planning permission for 150 dwellings on the same Green Belt site.
  • R (Ross & Sanders) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWHC 226 (Admin) - concerning the borderlines between the planning regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects and the conventional planning regime.
  • New World Payphones Ltd. v Westminster City Council [2019] EWCA Civ 2250 - concerning the permitted development right to install telephone kiosks also used for advertising.
  • CPRE (Surrey) and POWCampaign Ltd v Waverley Borough Council and Others, [2019] EWCA Civ 1826 - concerning the extent to which plan-makers must investigate unmet housing needs outside their area.
  • Eastleigh Borough Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2019] EWHC 1862 (Admin) - concerning the planning balance when a housing application breaches policy and the local planning authority can demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.
  • Hallam Land Management v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Eastleigh Borough Council [2018] EWCA Civ 1808 - concerning whether an exact calculation of housing land supply is required.
  • R (Tesco Stores Limited) v (1) Forest of Dean District Council (2) Asda Stores Limited and Others [2015] EWCA Civ 800 - defending the decision to grant planning permission for a superstore, a leading authority on the extent to which one can use speeches made in debate as a basis for impugning a council decision at the end of the debate.

-- Planning Policymaking

Paul advises on all aspects of planning policymaking, and has acted in numerous local plan examinations, both promoting plans on behalf of local planning authorities and promoting or resisting allocations on behalf of developers or interested parties. Paul also acts in related High Court challenges to local plans.

Cases of note

  • CPRE (Surrey) and POWCampaign Ltd v Waverley Borough Council and Others, [2019] EWCA Civ 1826 - concerning the extent to which plan-makers must investigate unmet housing needs outside their area.
  • Eastleigh Local Plan (2017-2022) - Paul led Ned Helme when successfully promoting the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2017-2022).
  • Wiltshire Local Plan (2021-2022) - Paul is advising Wiltshire Council (with Ned Helme) on the emerging Wiltshire Local Plan Review.
  • Wealden Local Plan (2018-2019) - Paul led Ned Helme when advising and representing Wealden District Council in the examination of the emerging Wealden Local Plan.

-- Planning Applications

Paul advises on every aspect of the planning application process (including the need for planning permission, permitted development rights, pre-application enquiries, application and environmental processes and requirements, conditions, planning obligations, and reserved matters approvals. Paul is often involved from an early stage, making strategic decisions as to when, and how, to promote significant developments. One recent, notable, success was securing permission for 446 new homes, restaurant, convenience store and community building, on a former shipyard side in Hebburn, South Tyneside. Paul is currently promoting a proposed development of 330 homes, all affordable and for key workers, on a green belt site in St Albans.

-- Planning Appeals, Hearings and Inquiries

Paul regularly appears at some of the largest and most important planning inquiries, both promoting and resisting development. 

Cases of note

  • Swindon Science Park - Paul recently appeared for Swindon Borough Council, successfully resisting a two-phase science park with over 80,0000m2 of class B1b and B1c development.
  • Eastleigh and Fareham Inquiries (2016-2021) - Paul has appeared in a multiple planning inquiries for local planning authorities resisting in excess of 3,000 homes pending the replacement of local plans and the establishment of a five-year supply of housing.
  • Stansted - Paul acted with Richard Wald QC in the 2021 30-day inquiry, resisting the further expansion of Stansted Airport, having also represented the same party in the 49-day 2007 inquiry.
  • Drake Park - Leading Richard Wald, Paul promoted “Drake Park”, a garden village development of up to 1,024 residential units on a green belt site in Elmbridge, Surrey, having previously led Ned Helme when successfully resisting an eco-town on the same site.
  • Radlett, near St Albans - Leading Ned Helme for a Rule 6 party in a four-week inquiry into a proposed strategic rail freight interchange, the biggest inappropriate green belt development ever proposed.

-- Planning Enforcement

Paul advises on all aspects of planning enforcement and frequently appears in both enforcement notice appeals and related High Court challenges.

Cases of note

  • Swindon Borough Council v Earthline - Paul recently secured a notable victory for Swindon Borough Council, successfully defending their enforcement against an HGV depot erected without planning permission at the former Wroughton Airfield in the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a decision Paul subsequently successfully defended against a High Court challenge.
  • R (Government of the Republic of France) v Kensington and Chelsea RLBC [2017] 1 WLR 320 - acting for the French government in a case concerning the concerning the scope of certificates of lawfulness under section 191 and 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and section 26H of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
  • Vallis v The Secretary of State for Local Government [2012] EWHC 578 (Admin) - a successful challenge against a decision which would have required the demolition of an historic barn. 
  • Avon Estates Ltd. v Welsh Ministers & Ceredigion County Council [2011] EWCA Civ 553, [2010] EWHC 1759 (Admin) - concerning the extent to which planning conditions restricting the use of a holiday park can have legal effect after the expiry of the permission to which they were attached. 
  • Sumner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 372 (Admin) - concerning the lawful use to which a building can be put when erected without permission and time has expired within which the building might be enforced against.

Environment

Paul regularly advises on environmental matters and has appeared in numerous inquiries, local plan examinations (including the independent examinations of the emerging Eastleigh and Wealden Local Plans) and High Court challenges related to climate change and other environmental issues.

Cases of note

  • R (GOESA Ltd.) v Eastleigh Borough Council and Southampton International Airport [2022] EWHC 1221 (Admin) – successfully resisting a judicial review of the council’s decision to permit the extension of the runway at Southampton airport in a leading case concerning the environmental impact assessment of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. 
  • R (Jennifer Dawes) v Secretary of State for Transport and Anor [CO/ 2917/ 2020] - leading Richard Wald QC and Gethin Thomas in a successful judicial review challenging the grant of a development consent order re-opening Manston Airport on climate change grounds.
  • R (Corrie) v Suffolk County Council [2014] EWHC 2490 (Admin) - successfully defending the decision of the Waste Authority to grant itself planning permission for a new waste facility.
  • R (Karen Treagus) v Suffolk County Council [2013] EWHC 950 (Admin) - successfully resisting an application for judicial review of a planning permission granted for an anaerobic digestion plant.

-- Biodiversity and Habitats

Paul has appeared in numerous inquiries and local plan examinations involving biodiversity and habitats issue, including the independent examinations of the emerging Eastleigh and Wealden Local Plans.

-- Climate Change

Paul has been involved in several leading-edge inquiries and legal challenges concerning climate change, particularly related to the inherent tension between government policy to expand aviation and make best use of existing runways, whilst committing itself to “net zero” in terms of carbon emissions.

Cases of note

  • Paul acted with Richard Wald QC in the 2021 30-day inquiry resisting the further expansion of Stansted Airport, inter alia on the grounds of greenhouse gas emissions and the impact on climate change and the ability to meet the “net zero” duty.
  • R (GOESA Ltd.) v Eastleigh Borough Council and Southampton International Airport [2022] EWHC 1221 (Admin) – successfully resisting a judicial review of the council’s decision to permit the extension of the runway at Southampton airport in a leading case concerning the environmental impact assessment of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions
  • R (GOESA Ltd.) v Eastleigh Borough Council and Southampton International Airport (CO/2465/2021) - resisting a judicial review of the council’s decision to permit the extension of the runway at Southampton Airport in a leading case concerning the environmental impact assessment of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. 
  • R (on the application of Jennifer Dawes) v Secretary of State for Transport and Anor) (CO/2917/2020) - quashing the grant of a development consent order approving the re-opening of Manston Airport, on the Isle of Thanet in Kent, as a dedicated freight airport - the first successful challenge to a DCO for a nationally significant infrastructure project since the introduction of the Planning Act 2008.
  • R (Ross & Sanders acting on behalf of Stop Stansted Expansion) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWHC 226 (Admin) - concerning the carbon emission modelling underpinning the government’s “Making Best Use” policy.

-- Nationally Significant Infrastructure

Paul has been involved in some of the leading legal challenges concerning national infrastructure projects and the development consent order regime. 

Cases of note

  • R (Ross & Sanders) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWHC 226 (Admin) - examined the borderlines between the planning regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects and the conventional planning regime and the extent to which it was possible to avoid the DCO process by “salami slicing” a project beneath the applicable NSIP thresholds.
  • Paul led Richard Wald QC and Gethin Thomas in R (on the application of Jennifer Dawes) v Secretary of State for Transport and Anor) (CO/2917/2020) - quashing the grant of a development consent order approving the re-opening of Manston Airport, on the Isle of Thanet in Kent, as a dedicated freight airport – the first successful challenge to a DCO for a NSIP since the introduction of the Planning Act 2008.

Administrative and Public

Paul practices in a very broad range of public law areas, including local government and human rights. 

Cases of note

  • R (Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum) v Wycombe District Council [2014] EWCA Civ 228; [2013] EWHC 513 (Admin) - representing Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum in a landmark case, the first to consider the neighbourhood planning provisions of the Localism Act 2011. 
  • Thomas v Bridgend County Borough Council [2011] EWCA Civ 862 - concerning the application of the Human Rights Act to the Acquisition of Land Act.
  • R (Kings Cross Railway Lands Group) v LB Camden [2007] EWHC 1515 (Admin) - affirming the right of local authorities to change their mind on planning applications after a change of political control.
  • O’Connor v Wiltshire County Council [2007] EWCA Civ 426 - another case concerning the application of the Human Rights Act to the Acquisition of Land Act.

-- Local Government

Paul advises and appears on all aspects of local government, including planning, compulsory purchase, finance-related matters, highways, and the lawful exercise of their powers in all areas. He has promoted local plans, resisted multiple planning inquiries and has appeared in many leading cases.

Cases of note

  • New World Payphones Ltd. v Westminster City Council [2019] EWCA Civ 2250 - concerning the permitted development right to install telephone kiosks also used for advertising.
  • CPRE (Surrey) and POWCampaign Ltd v Waverley Borough Council and Others, [2019] EWCA Civ 1826 - concerning the extent to which plan-makers must investigate unmet housing needs outside their area.
  • R (Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum) v Wycombe District Council [2014] EWCA Civ 228; [2013] EWHC 513 (Admin) - representing Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum in a landmark case, the first to consider the neighbourhood planning provisions of the Localism Act 2011
  • R (Kings Cross Railway Lands Group) v LB Camden [2007] EWHC 1515 (Admin) - affirming the right of local authorities to change their mind on planning applications after a change of political control.

Recommendations

  • “Paul is astonishingly quick to identify the key issues and develop coherent and persuasive arguments. He combines his hardworking nature with outstanding intellect and is a pleasure to work with.” The Legal 500 (2022)
  • “Paul gives a case everything – completely focused and in command of his brief.” The Legal 500 (2021)
  • “A highly committed advocate who gives a case 100%, and who is effective and easy to work with.” The Legal 500 (2021)
  • “Paul is a particularly persuasive advocate, brilliant in both cross-examination and submissions.” Chambers and Partners (2020) 
  • “He is very responsive, to the point, and offers clear guidance.” Chambers and Partners (2019) 
  • “Able to quickly grasp the salient facts and develop a logical strategy.” The Legal 500 (2019)