Property & Development

Transcription

1 Holmes & Hills Solicitors Property & Development In this issue: Planning Policy changes to look out for A boost for small developments Planning Law Updates 2016 Construction The right to Adjudicate Payment provisions case law update Commercial Property Changes to the EPC Requirements Drafting and serving break clauses correctly Landlord & Tenant The new rules for evicting tenants Issue 1

2 Leading the way in Planning Law services This latest announcement follows continued recognition of the team s expertise by both the Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners two independent directories of the UK s leading law firms which credit Holmes & Hills with being a leading source of Planning Law advice across the South East and East Anglia. Holmes & Hills Planning & Development Team has once again been recognised as one of the leading teams of Planning Law solicitors in the country by Planning Magazine, in its Law Survey As a leading publication for planning professionals, Planning Magazine has for some time produced a list of the country s top law firms for Planning Law advice. For the past three years Holmes & Hills has been listed among these, alongside international law firms. Holmes & Hills is the only law firm in Essex to be named and this year Holmes & Hills was ranked 33rd up from 45th in Commenting on the team, Chambers & Partners states: "They are a go-to firm for planning, the lawyers are more than happy to go into criminal as well as civil courts and planning is an area which needs both." Commenting on the news Steven Hopkins, Partner in Holmes & Hills Planning & Development Team said: We are very proud to have been recognised once again by Planning Magazine and to have improved our national ranking. This is an independent industry survey and therefore represents real recognition of the talent and experience we have in our Planning & Development Team to be rated alongside some of the UK s largest law firms. Holmes & Hills SERVICES PEOPLE CAREERS EVENTS CONTACT US Holmes & Hills Solicitors provide us with a variety of legal services for our business. With their help and hard work we recently completed the purchase of an agricultural estate a week ahead of schedule. Gary Sharp, Fristling Hall Farm Ltd See our new website at 2

3 Planning Planning Policy Changes what to watch out for The current Government has very clearly stated its intention to boost the housing supply. As ever policy changes and tweaks can be expected and I summarise what changes we may expect in the near future. Housing and Planning Act Having been given Royal Assent on 12 May this is a wide ranging Act to make provision about housing, estate agents, rent charges, planning and compulsory purchase. In planning terms the key highlights are: a) Starter Homes the definition is found in section 2 of the Act. There will be a general duty on all planning authorities to promote the supply of starter homes (section 4). The Act specifically sets out that regulations may, by way of example, provide that an English planning authority may grant planning permission only if a person has entered into a planning obligation to provide a certain number of starter homes or to pay a sum to be used by the authority for providing starter homes. b) Local Plans giving the Secretary of State ( SoS ) power to intervene in the production of Local Plans which may include a panel of relevant experts to determine and progress the production of Local Plans. It remains to be seen whether this provision is simply a threat or whether the SoS will actually invoke this power and take direct action. c) Neighbourhood Planning measures are proposed to speed-up and simplify the neighbourhood planning process including powers for the SoS to impose time limits for various parts of the process through further regulations. d) Changes to Permitted Development ( PD ) rights setting out a prior approval process for building operation PD rights. e) Processing of planning applications by alternative providers a power to the SoS to make provision for a planning application that falls to be determined by a specified local planning authority in England to be processed, if the applicant so chooses, not by that authority but by a designated person/provider. Again, it remains to be seen whether this stick will be used or whether it is simply a threat to underperforming authorities. f) Planning Permission in Principle ( PiP ) regulations will require a planning authority to keep a register of land for which PiP will be granted with details and planning obligations deferred. Once PiP is obtained an application for technical details consent is required before full planning permission is obtained. Prior to the grant of full permission conditions may be imposed and/or planning obligations required. It remains to be seen whether some will have a stand alone register or will include specific allocations in the Local Plan etc. Other changes coming through? Following a recent period of consultation potential changes to the NPPF and planning policy have been mooted including: a) Broadening the definition of Affordable Housing to include Starter Homes in short enabling local authorities to secure Starter Homes through negotiations on affordable housing. b) Increasing the density of residential development around commuter hubs the challenge will be to ensure that development promotes additional transport capacity and not add further congestion. c) Supporting new settlements a degree of co-operation will be required to ensure that new settlements provide not just homes but employment and leisure/recreational/social opportunities as well. d) Supporting housing on brownfield land and small (less than 10 unit) housing sites essentially providing a presumption in favour of brownfield land. I query whether such a presumption can or should override the golden thread of sustainability in circumstances where the brownfield/small sites are poorly located (i.e. remote or their development will cause unacceptable traffic congestion). e) Ensuring that housing is delivered on land allocated in plans it is proposed that the NPPF will introduce a housing delivery test. If so, I expect this to, in some way, feed into the powers reserved to the SoS where a local authority is underperforming or has been designated. By Michael Harman Associate in Planning & Development Team mjh@holmes-hills.co.uk Tel:

4 Planning A Boost for Small Developments In West Berkshire District Council and Reading Borough Council v. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2016] EWCA Civ 441 the Court of Appeal upheld the Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) of 28 November 2014 that prohibited Local Planning Authorities (LPA s) requesting affordable housing and tariff based contribution on sites of 10 or fewer homes and introduced a vacant building credit to set against affordable housing contributions. West Berkshire and Reading, initially challenged the WMS and Holgate J held that planning policy promulgated by the Secretary of State in the WMS was unlawful. The Court of Appeal found that the process to introduce the WMS had been fair. The judgment shows a broad approach in construing the way in which the Government can utilise its policy-making powers. Upon the original announcement of the WMS in November 2014 the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) was amended to insert the new polices, and subsequently re amended, following the judgment from Holgate J, to remove the policies. Following the amendment to the NPPG on 19th May 2016 the policies will now be in full force. So What Now? Housing and Planning Minister, Brandon Lewis commented that the judgment restores common sense but a spokesman for the DCLG has said that further information on the policies would be announced in due course. Background The requirements to provide affordable housing and tariff-based contributions (e.g. education and open space financial contributions) have been the norm for all development schemes. The Government decided that this practice was effectively producing more harm than good and was contributing to the construction of new housing falling significantly below housing need. With the intent to revitalise housing development the Government proposed to scrap the requirements on development schemes with 10 or less homes by the WMS. The original WMS stated: (i) Developments of 10 units or 1000 sq. m or less (including annexes and extensions) would be excluded from affordable housing levies and tariff based contributions; (ii) A lower threshold would apply in designated rural areas, National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (as defined in section 157 of the Housing Act 1985), with developments of 5 units or less to be excluded from affordable housing levies and tariff based contributions. Development of between 6 and 10 units would be subject to a commuted sum payable on or after completion; (iii) Where a vacant building is brought back into use or demolished for redevelopment, local authorities will provide a 'credit', equivalent to the floorspace of the vacant building, to be set against affordable housing contributions. Notwithstanding the initial period of uncertainty over the reinstatement of the policies in the NPPG, all LPA s now have clear guidance on the implementation of affordable housing and other chargeable tariffs on certain development schemes. This amendment now means that affordable housing and other chargeable tariff contributions will no longer be imposed on development schemes of 10 or less dwellings. By Joanna Lilliott Senior Solicitor in Planning & Development Team jkl@holmes-hills.co.uk Tel:

5 2016 Planning Law Updates what do you want to hear about? This autumn, Holmes & Hills Planning & Development Team will once again deliver their annual series of Planning Law Updates across Essex and Suffolk and we would like to hear from you what you think the hot topics are. Last year over 300 planning consultants, local authority planning officers, surveyors, property and land consultants, architects and developers booked to attend. We have not yet finalised dates and venues for this year s events, but whilst we do this we want to ask you what topics, issues or changes you see as being key and which you would like us to discuss at these events. We would very much appreciate your thoughts and you can quickly make your suggestions by going to: If you have not previously received an invitation to these events but would like to, you can use the same link as above to add yourself to the distribution list for invitations. Debt recovery for professional service providers Holmes & Hills Solicitors has launched a new fixed-fee debt recovery service offering professional service providers the ability to recover debts (such as unpaid invoices) for a fixed-fee, with no commission payable on the amount recovered. The service separates the debt recovery process into three distinct stages of escalating seriousness. There is a single fixed-fee associated with having a lawyer implement each individual stage. To download an electronic copy of the debt recovery service brochure which includes pricing information and full details of the service, see: By Steven Hopkins Partner in Planning & Development Team sch@holmes-hills.co.uk

6 Construction Law This occurred in the recent case of Fahstone Ltd v Biesse Group UK Ltd. In that case Fahstone obtained a favourable adjudicator s decision, which it sought to enforce by issuing proceedings (which included an application for summary judgment) in the TCC. Upon considering Fahstone s application, the Judge declined to order summary judgment on the basis that there was at least an arguable case that the contract (for the supply and installation of a large woodworking machine) was not a construction contract. If it was not a construction contract then of course there was no automatic statutory right to adjudicate. Construction Law articles By Sam Bawden Partner in Litigation Team scb@holmes-hills.co.uk The Judge therefore granted Biesse leave to defend the claim. In holding that there was an arguable case that the contract was not a construction contract (within the meaning of the Act), the Judge considered the degree to which the machine was fixed to the land (by 50 rods) and the extent to which it could easily be removed (in other words, the degree to which it formed part of the land). Do you really have the right to Adjudicate? It remains to be seen what the Court will make of this issue if and when the claim eventually reaches trial. However, the case serves as a warning to those considering commencing adjudication. If there is any doubt, advice should be sought as to whether the contract is in fact a construction contract within the meaning of the Act and, therefore, whether statutory adjudication is available. If it is not, the parties will of course be free to litigate but the timescale will inevitably be much longer than that of adjudication. Since the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 came into force, parties to construction contracts have had a statutory right to refer disputes arising under those contracts for adjudication. Although not without its critics, there can be no doubt that adjudication is an effective method for assisting parties with getting a prompt resolution of their disputes (even if that can be fairly rough justice ). If that is the route that a party must take then it would be wise to save time and costs by starting on that route immediately, rather than wasting time on an inappropriate adjudication. However, it pays to consider from time to time just what the scope of this statutory right is, and certainly before any dispute is referred to adjudication. In addition to agreements for the provision of certain design and advisory services, construction contracts are defined under the Act as agreements for the carrying out, arranging for the carrying out and/or providing labour for the carrying out of construction operations. Construction operations are also defined within the Act; very broadly speaking, they refer to activities which erect, demolish or alter buildings or structures which form part of the land. As with most defined terms, there may well be contracts which one might ordinarily assume were construction contracts but which in fact do not fall within the specific definitions of the Act. 6

7 Payment Provisions case law update The 2014 case of ISG Construction Limited v Seevic College confirmed that in the absence of a Payment or Pay Less Notice issued in time by the employer, the contractor becomes entitled to the amount stated in its interim application, irrespective of the true value of the work actually carried out. This had profound implications for the industry as it left disorganised employers at risk of having to pay potentially vast sums by default, even if those sums did not reflect the true value of the works. However, recent judgments handed down in the TCC have shown some relaxation of that rule. Galliford Try Building Limited v Estura Limited In the absence of any Payment or Pay Less Notice from Estura, an Adjudicator held that Galliford was entitled to an interim payment of approximately 4m. Estura did not pay and Galliford issued an application for Summary Judgment in the TCC to enforce the Adjudicator s decision. The Court held that Estura did not have a defence and entered Summary Judgment against it. However, having considered Estura s submissions about its inability to pay, the Court stayed enforcement of the judgment at just 1.5m. The Judge s reasoning was that full enforcement would likely stifle Estura s ability to fund subsequent proceedings to recover sums which, it argued, were never due to Galliford on a proper valuation of the works. Contractors and employers should take note, however, that the Judge emphasised that a case justifying a partial stay would be exceptional and rare. Leeds City Council v Waco UK Limited There had been a history of Waco issuing applications on dates other than those specified in the contract (one was premature; most were late) and LCC s agent certifying them for payment. However, application 21 was submitted 6 days early and LCC s agent refused to certify it. On Adjudication, it was held that the sum claimed by Waco was payable on the basis that LCC had not issued any Payment/Pay Less Notices. LCC applied to the Court for an Order that application 21 was invalid as it had been submitted prematurely. The Judge held that, despite there being a previous incidence of a premature application which was certified, this did not amount to a course of dealings that Waco could rely on; its application 21 was invalid and the Adjudicator s Decision was wrong. In giving judgment the Court gave a clear warning against relying on a previous course of dealings in place of express contractual requirements. Caledonian Modular Limited v Mar City Developments Limited In this case, following 15 interim applications in standard form, Caledonian had sent an with Construction Law attached documents to Mar on 13 February 2015 requesting that they amend/update the current payment notice and take into account an interim assessed figure of 125, Mar promptly sought confirmation from Caledonian as to the nature and intended purpose of that , but Caledonian was unable to confirm by return. On 19 March 2015, Caledonian submitted five invoices and a Final Account Application Summary, reflecting the value of the invoices. On 26 March 2015, Mar issued a Pay Less Notice. In Adjudication, Caledonian argued that the of 13 February 2015 was a new application for payment/ payee s notice and that its invoice of 19 March 2015 was a Default Payment Notice. Whilst the Adjudicator agreed, the Court did not. The Judge s reasoning included the fact that Caledonian had failed to say, either in its of 13 February 2015, or when asked about it, or in its invoice of 19 March 2015 that those documents were intended to be relevant notices. The Judge indicated that contractors who want the benefit of the new payment regime are obliged to set out their interim payment claims with proper clarity and that employers who are at risk must be given reasonable notice that the payment period has commenced. Henia Investments Inc v Beck Interiors Limited On 28 April 2015 Beck issued an interim application which was 6 days late for the next Payment Due Date (29 April 2015). It did not issue an interim application for the subsequent Payment Due Date (29 May 2015). In respect of that later Payment Due Date, the CA issued an Interim Certificate (which was late) and Henia then submitted a Pay Less Notice. Beck sought to argue that the interim application issued on 28 April 2015 was, in fact, a valid application for the 29 May 2015 Payment Due Date and, because the CA s Interim Certificate was late, the sum specified in Beck s application was now due. The Court held that Beck s 28 April application was not a valid application for the May Payment Due Date. Its reasoning was that there was a prior relevant due date, there was nothing in the application to suggest it related to a later due date and the application only valued the works up to 30 April The message from this case is that to avoid challenges to its validity, an interim application needs to be clear and unambiguous about what it relates to. Summary It is evident that the Courts are finding ways to distinguish cases on their facts from the rule in ISG Construction. However, it is evident that, at least for now, the rule will continue to apply unless there are fairly exceptional circumstances. Those in the industry would be wise to assume that the rule will apply rather than to attempt to rely on one of the above exceptions. It waits to be seen how the Court will further clarify the law in this area during

8 Construction Law Top Tips For Ensuring You Are Paid (Or Pay) The Correct Interim Amounts Ensuring the correct payments are made for works completed at each interim stage are one of the major areas of dispute in construction contracts. Here are our top tips for ensuring you are paid (or pay) the correct amounts: 1) Know when all Payment Due Dates and Final Dates for Payment are under the Contract. The dates for both the contractor and the employer to serve relevant payment notices are calculated by reference to these dates (either pursuant to the terms of the contract or implied by statute). It sounds obvious but if you do not know when these dates are, you risk missing the deadlines for issuing relevant notices (which can have the effect of crystallising the amount that is payable by default). 2) Make sure all Notices relating to payment are issued on time. If the Contract does not provide for specific dates, you must ensure you are aware of the dates imposed by statute. If notices are issued late, they will be invalid. For example, if an employer issues a Pay Less Notice late, it will be of no effect and the employer will, by default, be bound to pay the amount set out in any previous Payment Notice/Default Payment Notice. 3) When issuing any Notices relating to payment, make it clear what those documents are intended to be. If you fail to properly identify those documents, perhaps in the hope that you will be able to sneak them past the other party and obtain their benefit by default, you risk a Judge holding that they are not what you intended them to be (and consequently that they do not have the effect you desire). 4) Consider including a contractual clause which allows for negative interim valuations and repayments. Without that, if the employer fails, for whatever reason, to issue a valid Pay Less Notice in respect of an interim valuation which it considers to be inflated (and the contractor therefore becomes entitled to payment of the full amount set out in a previous Payment Notice/Default Payment Notice) the employer will have no ability to recover any perceived overpayment until the Final Account. By including a clause that allows for negative interim valuations and repayments, this opens up the possibility of the employer recovering any overpayment at the next interim payment stage. 5) Do not rely on the other party s previous flexibility regarding the dates for issuing notices; stick rigidly to contractual deadlines. Where parties have previously been lax about the dates on which relevant notices are issued, the Court has discretion to hold that such course of dealings amounts to a variation of the terms of the contract between them (in other words, an agreement that notices may always be served late). However, whether or not the Court finds such a variation will be highly fact sensitive. It would be extremely dangerous to assume that where a party has previously accepted a notice that was issued late, they will continue to accept all notices late or, if they do not, that the Court will find that they ought to accept them late. Avoid the risk by complying with the contractual deadlines for issuing notices. 8

9 Commercial Property Changes to the Energy Performance Certificate Requirements It has been a requirement since 2007 for a seller or landlord to provide a buyer or tenant with an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) which sets out the energy rating of the property. The Energy Act 2011 contains a number of provisions which will affect owners and occupiers of commercial property. The most significant are the proposed Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards (MEES). From 1st April 2018 the proposed legislative changes would make it unlawful to let commercial premises with an EC rating of F or G; being the lowest two grades of energy efficiency. This would have significant implications for landlords or occupiers who wish to assign the premises they occupy with either of these ratings. A financial penalty regime will start to apply to landlords who let out premises that do not meet the MEES. It is thought that over time the minimum E standard will rise however, the government have not indicated how quickly this will rise. Implementation of the regulations will be staggered so that they apply to new lettings from 1 April 2018 and this will include lease renewals where an EPC exists. From the 1 April 2023 implementation of the regulations will apply to existing lettings but only if the property has a valid EPC on the relevant date. There is no obligation in this regard to obtain an EPC if one does not already exist but there is no exemption if an EPC was obtained voluntarily. How will this affect you? If your commercial property falls within the EC rating of F & G there is a risk in the future that valuations of properties could be lower if their marketability is affected and this could affect any future sale, rental ability or banking finance which you may wish to secure on the property in the future. In addition to this, rent reviews may be affected and there could be implication for dilapidation assessments. Exemptions There are a number of circumstances where the proposed changes do not apply and the main exemptions are as follows: a) Properties that do not require an EPC under the EPC regulations or building regulations will not fall within the MEES i.e. a listed building; b) Leases of 6 months or less or long leases of 99 years or more are not subject to the new regulation. The 6 month exemption is however subject to a 12 month maximum period of occupation to be assessed at the date when the latest lease is granted; c) Landlords will also be exempt from reaching the E rating where all possible cost effective improvements have been carried out. It is unsure how this exemption will apply in practice and further guidance is awaited; d) Where the landlord cannot obtain necessary consents or where compliance would devalue the property by 5% or more there is a 5 year exemption. The Regulations provide that from 2023 any successor landlord or sub-standard property will not benefit from an existing exemption. The new landlord will have to bring the rating up to an E rating themselves within 6 months of the acquisition or alternatively, establish a new exemption. Action to be taken Where a commercial property rating is sub-standard, landlords should start to consider what steps can be taken with a view to improving the energy efficiency rating in advance of the implementation dates. If your property is affected you may want to consider obtaining advice from a surveyor at this stage so that you can ascertain the likely costs of having to carry out improvement works. A B C D E F G 9

10 Commercial Property The Importance of Correctly Drafted Break Clauses and Service A break clause can be included in a fixed term lease allowing either the landlord or the tenant to terminate the lease early. The break clause may specify one or more dates when it is exercisable or it may be used at any time during the term of the lease on a rolling basis. This is known as a rolling break. Any conditions attached to the right to break must be strictly adhered to. A break clause requires careful drafting and will state who may operate the right to break. Conditions may be specified in order for the break clause to operate and can include all or a selection of the following: - a) The tenant must have paid all of the rent or all payments due under the lease; b) The tenant must have performed all of its covenants; c) The tenant must not be in material breach of its repairing covenants; d) The tenant must give vacant possession. The break clause should specify whether the conditions must be satisfied at the date of service of the break notice or at the break date, or both. If the lease prescribes a particular form of notice to exercise the break, it must be used in order to validly effect the break notice. A break clause may contain express provisions for dealing with the service of the break notice and in this event, the party seeking to serve notice of the break must comply with these provisions. It is important to consider the requirements of the relevant clause and whether those requirements have been satisfied, it is always advisable for a party to protect its position by keeping evidence of its compliance. This was considered in the case of Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Life Assurance Co Ltd [1997] and the court held that if the [notice] clause had said that the notice had to be on blue paper, it would have been no good serving on pink paper, however clear it might have been that the tenant wanted to terminate the lease and in light of the comment on this case shows the particular importance for the parties to strictly comply with the notice requirements and the courts strict stance on this issue. Generally, a notice served by the wrong person or on the wrong person will be invalid. This issue was explored in the case of Standard Life Investments Property Holdings vs W & J Linney Ltd [2010] where the tenant under the lease served notice on a party which was not its immediate landlord. The High Court held that the notice was invalid. Whilst it may appear clear who the tenant should serve a break notice on, this particular case highlighted some of the pitfalls in serving a break notice; the landlord, Capita, in this instance granted an overriding lease to Standard Life for a term longer than Linney s lease. The effect of this was that Standard Life became Linney s landlord and rent was now payable to them. Unfortunately, the tenant served notice on their original landlord, Capita. We would always advise you to seek legal advice in respect of the drafting of a lease & break clauses and the service of any break notices. This is to ensure that these adequately meet your requirements and that you comply with the correct requirements of the break clause whether you are a landlord or tenant; otherwise the right to break may be lost and as a tenant, liability under the lease would continue for the remainder of the term. Commercial Property articles by Wendy Martin Associate in Commercial Property Team wm@holmes-hills.co.uk

11 Residential Landlord & Tenant Law New rules governing the eviction of tenants Residential landlords with property let under an Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) need to be aware of legal changes which came into force on the 1st of October These changes, which affect the procedure for giving valid notice to a tenant and ending the tenancy, include the items covered below. Rather ironically, these additional requirements and limitations are placed on landlords by the Deregulation Act I discussed these new rules in greater detail than I do here at two seminars for landlords which took place in Braintree and Sudbury in March. I was joined at these events by a guest speaker from the National Landlords Association. New Prescribed Form of Section 21 Notice Landlords must use this new form when terminating ASTs granted on or after 1st October 2015 or risk the notice being invalid. For the Notice to be valid the following apply: a) Notice cannot be served within the first 4 months of a tenancy (therefore the earliest this new notice could have been served is 1/2/16); b) The Notice must state that a valid Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) has been provided to the Tenant; c) Must state that a valid annual Gas Safety Certificate (GSC) has been provided to the Tenant; d) That a copy of the guide How to Rent: The Checklist for Renting in England has been provided to the Tenant. Landlords utilising six month ASTs might consider the practical implications of point 1) above and the difficulty they may have in timing valid delivery of the notice to provide for eviction at the end of the sixth month. Landlords with a statutory periodic tenancy in place are likely to be pleased to learn that, where the periodic arrangement has arisen on the expiry of a fixed-term AST which was granted prior to October 2015, the old Section 21 regime will continue to apply. Importantly, the new legislation also imposes a use it or lose it provision by stipulating that possession proceedings must be commenced within a period of six months from the date of service of the new Section 21 Notice. Other Changes: Protection from retaliatory eviction This is the change likely to create the greatest waves in the industry. Under the new rules, landlords may now lose the right to serve a valid Section 21 Notice (and therefore the ability to end the tenancy) if: a) The Landlord fails to respond to a Tenant s complaint about the condition of the property within 14 days and explain the specific action they intend to take to fix the problem, along with likely timescales; b) In the absence of the Landlord s appropriate response/repair work, and in the event the tenant contacts the relevant Local Authority who subsequently verifies the need for repairs and serves a relevant notice upon the Landlord. If the Local Authority issues relevant repair notices in relation to the property then the Landlord will not be permitted to evict the Tenant (using the Section 21 procedure) for a period of 6 months. If the Landlord has served a Section 21 notice already - following a tenant s complaint but prior to notice from or repairs by the Local Authority - the notice will become invalid on involvement of the local authority. Landlords need to be aware of these new rules and the potential pitfalls of serving an invalid Section 21 Notice. By David Dixey Senior Chartered Legal Executive in Litigation Team dd@holmes-hills.co.uk

12 Meet our property and development solicitors in Essex & Suffolk From five offices across Essex & Suffolk, our specialist lawyers advise and represent local authorities, developers, land owners and home owners across the region. Litigation: Sam Bawden Partner Commercial Property: Philippa Jerram Senior Solicitor Katherine Letts Solicitor Wendy Martin Associate Rebecca Mason Partner Stacey Woolmer Trainee Solicitor Michael Wright Consultant David Dixey Senior Chartered Legal Executive Planning & Development: Michael Harman Associate Steven Hopkins Partner Joanna Lilliott Senior Solicitor Tom McPhie Senior Solicitor David Whipps Consultant Holmes & Hills Braintree Halstead Sudbury Tiptree Coggeshall Holmes & Hills LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England & Wales under Registration Number OC Registered Office Dale Chambers, Bocking End, Braintree, Essex, CM7 9AJ. All our partners are Solicitors of England & Wales. We use partner or partners to mean a member of Holmes & Hills LLP. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority SRA Number: