Philip Rule

Viewing: Planning and Environment for Philip Rule

Philip is instructed in a variety of regulatory and public law contexts, and has considerable experience and expertise in particular in:
(1) Judicial review proceedings, and appeals by way of case stated, predominantly for claimants, but also for local authorities and defendant companies;
(2) Injunctions proceedings;
(3) Proceeds of Crime Act confiscation proceedings and applications; and
(4) Cases involving human rights and environmental protections, with obligations and rights established in international treaties including in the EU Charter, and ECHR Protocols, as well as relevant UN Conventions. His experience includes cases concerning gypsy and travellers’ rights brought before the Administrative Court.
In the planning and environmental law context Philip is particularly interested in the protection of the environment and of wildlife (aquatic, marine and land-based), pollution and waste disposal, and assurance of air and water quality conditions for both human and animal populations.
Philip has considerable experience amassed during over 19 years’ full time practice at the Bar. As well as public law and regulatory work, he has years of experience of both criminal and civil work and is able to provide tactical and practical advice where proceedings are concurrently running in different jurisdictions.
Philip has considerable experience in drafting and advocacy in matters that have gone before the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal (both Civil and Criminal Divisions), the Divisional Court, Administrative Court, Queen’s Bench Division and other higher tribunals and courts. He also represents and advises individuals before tribunals and regulatory bodies; and has brought proceedings to the European Court of Human Rights.
Philip regularly presents seminars run by No5 and externally to solicitors and to events hosted by professional representative organisations.
Examples of Work Undertaken
Philip is a versatile and thorough advocate, with considerable experience of appellate proceedings, and particularly well-placed to be able to advise and represent where there are concurrent proceedings arising from events.
Philip has acted in several Supreme Court cases that proceeded to a full hearing, and has drafted submissions to the Supreme Court on a number of other occasions (both written applications, and respondent’s objections). He has appeared in the Supreme Court, and at all levels of the appellate system. He has drafted submissions and advised in relation to appeals to the Privy Council also.
Many of Philip’s appeal cases have involved points of law of general public importance, and are frequently subject to law report and inclusion in the leading textbooks.
Recommendations
Listed as a leading junior barrister annually since 2013, with commentary including that:
“He goes the extra mile for his clients”
Legal 500 (2019)
He is “Frighteningly intelligent”
Legal 500 (2018)
“His ability to form the most complex legal arguments is outstanding”, and “He has great attention to detail and a professional manner with clients”
Legal 500 (2017)
He “Goes above and beyond…” the work of others, and is a “very confident operator in judicial review matters”
Legal 500 (2016)
“Able to intersect different areas of law to obtain the best possible outcome”
Legal 500 (2014)
Notable Cases
R (Kearney) v Chief Constable of Hants [2019] EWCA Civ 1841; [2019] 4 WLR 144; [2019] 10 WLUK 454; [2019] All ER (D) 24 (Nov).
Jurisdictional question concerning s18 SCA 1981; “clear and well-structured arguments”.
Connell v SSHD [2018] 1 WLR 3930; [2018] EWCA Civ 1329
Minter v United Kingdom (application 62964/14) (2017) 65 E.H.R.R. SE6
R v Docherty [2016] UKSC 62; [2017] 1 WLR 181; [2017] 1 Cr.App.R.(S) 31 (234); [2017] 4 All E.R. 263; [2017] 1 Archbold Review 5; (2017) 81 J.C.L. 232.
Point of law of general public importance certified by Court of Appeal: [2014] EWCA Crim 1582. Queen’s Counsel was instructed to draft the notice of objection for the Crown in reply to Philip’s application for permission, but permission was granted in February 2015 (UKSC 2014/0207). The Secretary of State intervened in the proceedings. Philip presented oral submissions to the Supreme Court on an additional ground concerning discriminatory treatment.
Massey v United Kingdom (application (28160/15) (2016) 62 E.H.R.R. SE13
London Borough of Newham v Sumal and Sons [2013] 1 WLR 2078; [2012] EWCA Crim 1840; [2012] Lloyd’s Rep. F.C. 692; [2012] H.L.R. 46; [2012] 2 P and CR DG19; CLW 12/31/3
Appeal against confiscation order allowed; rent obtained when offence committed contrary to s95 Housing Act 2004 not property obtained as a result of or in connection with the offence. Raised a number of novel legal arguments concerning the Proceeds of Crime Act regime, and its application to summary-only offences. The Supreme Court subsequently refused permission to the prosecutor to appeal against Philip’s success in this case.
Lord-Castle v DPP [2009] EWHC 87 (Admin); [2009] All ER (D) 181 (Jan.); CLW 09/06/06; LTL doc. AC0119722
Crimeline updater 294 [Commentary at 153 CL and J 86] [Regulations concerning private ambulances and sirens and blue lights; meaning of “ambulance” purposes]
Onasanya v London Borough of Newham [2006] EWHC 1775 (Admin); [2006] 4 All ER 459; [2006] All ER (D) 199 (Jul)
Criminal Law Week CLW/06/32/04; Crimeline updater issue 181, case and commentary. [Interpretation of the legislation concerning street-trading motor vehicles. Philip acted for the appellant accused].
Appointments
HSE, CQC, Env. Agency, et al., Regulatory Counsel A-panel
Equalities and Human Rights Commission Panel of Counsel
Called to the Bar of the Cayman Islands (2017)
Selected expert for the Lexis Nexis PSL Q and A panel
Memberships
Administrative Law Bar Association
Criminal Bar Association
Bar Human Rights Committee
Human Rights Lawyers Association
Unexplained Wealth Orders (2018) 182 C.L. and J 97, and CBQ Spring 2018 p8.
Lawful Stopping of Vehicles (2009) 174 CL and JW 121
What it means to be an ambulance (2009) 153 C.L. and J. (Criminal Law and Justice) 86 (concerns regulations on vehicles being fitted with a siren, or blue beacon lights)
The power to re-open the case in the “interests of justice” and Croydon (2009) 173 CL and J 213 (considering proper approach to s142 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980)
Viewing the Locus in Quo and Reconstruction of Events (2009) 173 CL and JW 406
Licensing Act Offences (2007) Entertainment Law Review Volume 18 Issue 7 (Sweet and Maxwell) 231; (2007) 171 JPN 50 (at p879) and 171 JPN 51 (at p899).
Confiscation Orders: Criminal Justice Act 1988 - Enforcement and Extension of Time to Pay (2007) Vol. 171 Justice of the Peace 607; (2007) 151 Solicitors Journal 1178
Street Trading and Interpretation of s38 London Local Authorities Act 1990 (2006) 170 Justice of the Peace Journal 604 [170 J.P.N. 604]

Latest News & Publications

On 15 July 2020 the Vice-President, Lord Justice Fulford, and Mrs Justice Whipple dismissed a judicial review brought against the Secretary of State claiming interference with, or the appearance of interference with, the independence of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (“CCRC”) (R (Warner) v SSJ [2020] EWHC 1894 (Admin))....

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020
On 17 June 2020 Mostyn J granted permission to the claimant, RM, to bring judicial review proceedings against the Manchester City Council...

Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020
Barrister Philip Rule examines the relationship between false imprisonment & Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights....

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020