Harriet Townsend KC

> People > Barristers > Harriet Townsend KC

Harriet Townsend KC is a leading practitioner in planning and environment, compulsory purchase and highways law, acting for a wide range of clients throughout England and Wales. She was appointed King’s Counsel in 2025.

Harriet is a highly effective and well-regarded public law advocate, regularly appearing in the High Court and Court of Appeal. As Chambers and Partners 2025 put it “Harriet is a master of communication.” “She is always professional and is a pleasure to work with.” The Legal 500 says “Harriet has the ability to reach the heart of a matter quickly whilst retaining a bird’s eye view of the wider picture.”

Harriet represented the principal Respondent in the Supreme Court case Finch v Surrey County Council, now the leading case on the scope of environmental impact assessment of fossil fuel development. She has a particular interest in climate change as a cross-disciplinary legal and policy issue and is a member of Cornerstone Climate’s steering group, responsible for the innovative series of webinars begun in 2024, Cornerstone’s Climate Month.

Harriet is noted for her knowledge and skill in the field of compulsory purchase and compensation. She is currently working on two complex compensation claims and promoting a CPO for a London Borough.

Recent work includes the following, (for more detail please see under Planning and Environment) :-

Judicial review and statutory appeals in the higher courts. Issues of statutory and policy interpretation; heritage assessment; environmental impact assessment; and the public sector equality duty, are prominent in Harriet’s recent cases;
Planning and enforcement appeals at inquiry and hearings, with evidence on (for example) sustainability; biodiversity net gain; heritage impact; air quality; and green/grey belt policy development;
Community Infrastructure Levy, including ongoing enforcement proceedings;
Nutrient neutrality requirements and development;
The obligations of public authorities to provide access to information;
The potential liabilities of public authorities in cases of coastal erosion;
Local authority conduct.

Harriet is a former committee member of the Planning and Environment Bar Association (PEBA), and a member of UKELA; the Compulsory Purchase Association (CPA); the National Infrastructure Planning Association (NIPA); and the Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA).

Harriet is regularly engaged to speak at conferences and to provide training. She is responsible for planning and delivering Cornerstone’s Climate Month, she spoke at Cornerstone’s 2024 Planning Day on compulsory purchase practice, and she has for several years provided an annual legal update to the POS minerals and waste working group.

Harriet writes on planning obligations and CIL for Lexis Nexis Planning Law Service; and a monthly case commentary for the Journal of Planning Law.

Harriet is a registered Public Access barrister; this means potential clients may not need to instruct an intermediary in order to work with Harriet. Before accepting direct instructions, Harriet reviews the scope of the work required and its suitability for a direct access instruction. No fees are charged until a bespoke agreement is reached as to the scope of work required and related fees (this is often called a client care letter).

Expertise

Planning and Environment
Harriet is an experienced specialist in planning and environment law and noted in the main Legal Directories as a leader in these fields. She has substantial experience of most of the technically complex issues in planning including:
- Climate change and its implications for planning and environmental law
- Nutrient neutrality and biodiversity net gain
- Housing land supply
- Compulsory purchase and compensation
- The Community Infrastructure Levy and planning obligations
- Energy development including solar and wind energy proposals
- Green/grey belt policy
- Basement policy in London Boroughs
- Heritage protection: the assessment and mitigation of impact – including enabling development proposals
- Viability assessments
- Contempt of court – and planning injunctions
Environmental work outside the planning field includes:
- The Aarhus Convention and environmental information
- Local authority duties re contaminated land
- Actions for nuisance (including mediation)
Harriet’s inquiry work has included major commercial development in the green belt; contentious residential development proposals; solar and onshore wind energy development. It has involved evidence and legal argument on green and grey belt policy; biodiversity; heritage law and policy; infrastructure funding; best and most versatile agricultural land, and energy policy.

Harriet is familiar with the different legal and policy requirements in England and Wales and is following closely the areas where the two jurisdictions diverge. Of particular note in that respect is the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act 2016 which applies only in Wales. The same goes for the UK’s departure from the European Union, which has had such a fundamental role in the development of UK environmental law hitherto.

For significant recent cases please refer to the main Profile or to Cases and News.

Harriet also works on small scale proposals in sensitive locations which raise challenging legal and planning issues. Examples include alterations to dwellings which are listed buildings, river-edge development adjoining the Thames, and assets of community value.

She continually demonstrates her ability to explain complex, difficult decisions and matters of planning balance to a wide audience.
Chambers UK Bar (2025)

Harriet has the ability to reach the heart of a matter quickly whilst retaining a bird’s eye view of the wider picture. Her advocacy is sharp and detailed.
Legal 500 (2025)

Harriet is very astute, approachable and takes a measured approach to the judge.
Chambers UK Bar (2024)

Her advocacy is calm and well-structured, always confident that she is well-prepared and that she will deal with matters as they arise.
Legal 500 (2024)

A very intelligent barrister who quickly grasps the complex issues surrounding a matter, she is methodical, intuitive, composed and sharp.
Legal 500 (2023)

Harriet has an impressive way of combining expertise and client service which inspires confidence. Her ability to cut to the chase and pinpoint issues whilst ensuring that the client is fully informed is a much valued skill.
Chambers UK Bar (2023)

About Harriet

Testimonials
- Planning – “Harriet has been very thorough and refreshing.” “She continually demonstrates her ability to explain complex, difficult decisions and matters of planning balance to a wide audience.” “Harriet is a master of communication.” “She is always professional and is a pleasure to work with.” “Harriet provided outstanding advice and service levels.” Chambers and Partners 2025
- Planning – “Harriet has the ability to reach the heart of a matter quickly whilst retaining a bird’s eye view of the wider picture. Her advocacy is sharp and detailed. Her communication is intuitive. She is able to read the room and act accordingly. She also establishes a good rapport with all others involved in a matter which assists with her advocacy.” Legal 500 2025
- Planning – “Harriet is very astute, approachable and takes a measured approach to the judge.” Chambers and Partners 2024
- Planning – “Harriet is always prompt, organised and professional. Her advocacy is calm and well-structured, always confident that she is well-prepared and that she will deal with matters as they arise.” Legal 500 2024
- Planning – “Harriet is a very intelligent barrister who quickly grasps the complex issues surrounding a matter. She is methodical and intuitive and able to set out issues and solutions in a way which is accessible to a variety of disciplines including the legal team. Harriet’s advocacy is composed and sharp. She is able to navigate to the heart of a matter, taking all parties with her in an exceptionally clear way.” Legal 500 2023
- Planning – “She is reassuringly knowledgeable and experienced with a natural ability to provide pragmatic and nuanced advice.” Chambers and Partners 2023
- Planning – “Harriet has an impressive way of combining expertise and client service which inspires confidence. Her ability to cut to the chase and pinpoint issues whilst ensuring that the client is fully informed is a much valued skill.” Chambers and Partners 2023
- Planning – “She provided detailed advice, at short notice, on a complex matter involving an awareness of political sensitivities.” Chambers and Partners 2023
- Planning – “Harriet is professional and approachable.” Chambers and Partners 2023
- Environment – “She has the ability to understand quickly and completely the complex issues involved, and she provides thorough and confident advocacy.” Legal 500 2022
- Planning – “Has a strong track record of handling CPO cases, development inquiries, enforcement appeals and other hearings. She has recently been tackling matters relating to significant residential schemes and sensitive cases involving heritage or preservation concerns. She acts for local authorities, as well as campaign groups, individuals and developers. Strengths: “She is consistently excellent in her clear and reasoned advice, her approach, her effectiveness and her willingness to work closely with the client.” “Her written product is good and she has a good manner with the client.” Chambers and Partners 2021
- “A highly competent barrister and always our first point of call for planning advice. Her honest and clear advice has been invaluable to me and my team. She approaches each matter comprehensively, with an enquiring mind and clear communication at all times. She balances her fierce intelligence with kindness and good humour and is always a pleasure to work with.” Legal 500 2021
- “A very diligent and thoughtful barrister, always with one eye on overall litigation strategy and the client’s commercial objectives.” Legal 500 2021
- “She is thorough, has a grasp of detail, is very hard-working and has a very pleasant style.” Chambers and Partners 2020
- “Very good at dealing with difficult and disorganised clients.” The Legal 500 2020
- “A voice of authority and a great strategic thinker with a friendly and diplomatic manner.” The Legal 500 2020
- “She has a careful, analytical approach to problem solving. As an advocate, Harriet is adept and courteous. She is reliable and has a calm and pleasant manner which makes her a pleasure to work with.” “She is knowledgeable and very well organised. An excellent advocate who is very confident.” Chambers and Partners 2019
- “A personable junior who provides prompt advice.” The Legal 500 2018
- “Enthusiastic, approachable and extremely supportive: her knowledge of compulsory purchase orders is excellent.” The Legal 500 2018
- “Her advocacy at CPO public inquiries is excellent, and she’s very good at getting to the nub of things eaisly. A very good advocate who provides effective and practical advice.” – Chambers and Partners 2018
- “She provides efficient and practical advice.” Legal 500 2017
- “‘Well liked by clients.” Legal 500 2017
- “She has excellent knowledge of planning and environmental law. A very surefooted advocate who is without arrogance. She shows good judgement when presenting cases and is very thorough in her preparation.” Chambers & Partners 2017
- “A wonderful barrister, who is calm, fabulous with clients, fiercely bright and a great advocate.” Legal 500 2016
- “A knowledgeable and thorough junior” who “makes sure there is a team ethic” – Chambers & Partners 2016
- “An excellent advocate at public inquiries; she sees the wood from the trees.” Legal 500 2016
- Harriet is “thorough and calm under pressure” – Legal 500 2016
- Harriet “provides clear and practical advice” – Chambers & Partners 2015
Significant recent cases
- Freemont (Denbigh) Limited v Denbighshire County Council – for the acquiring authority – compensation for compulsory purchase. Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) hearing listed for April 2026.
- London Borough of Sutton (Elm Grove) Compulsory Purchase Order 2024 – for the acquiring authority – inquiry April 2025.
- Hilltop v Norfolk County Council – for the Respondent – judicial review of a decision to grant planning permission for a household waste recycling centre. Grounds include consideration of alternatives, and the public sector equality duty. Two day hearing completed February 2025.
- Greystoke v South Oxfordshire District Council – planning appeal: 120,000m² class E commercial development in the green belt at Waterstock – for the Waterstock Parish Meeting rule 6 party. Inquiry over 16 days ended 22 January 2025: notable in particular for green/grey belt; disputed biodiversity net gain; adequacy of the EIA.
- East Suffolk District Council v Melton Meadows (Property) Limited – an application for a Liability Order under reg.97 of the CIL Regulations 2010 – for the applicant – granted.
- ESC v Tingdene (North Denes) Ltd – application for a mandatory planning injunction requiring removal of engineering works which laid the ground for a caravan park the Respondent claimed to be entitled to develop – for the applicant – granted.
- Finch v Surrey County Council and others – acting for the first Respondent – judicial review of a decision to grant planning permission for commercial extraction of oil (leading Alex Williams). Success in High Court and Court of Appeal overturned by Supreme Court. Leading case on scope of EIA in fossil fuel development.
- Cutlers Green Solar planning appeal (leading Olivia Davies) – acting for Uttlesford District Council which had refused permission for this solar farm due to its landscape and visual impact, heritage impact, and the associated loss of best and most versatile agricultural land. Appeal succeeded December 2023.
- Braithwaite v East Suffolk Council – acting for the Respondent – judicial review of a decision to issue a CIL Liability Notice and Demand Notice when it had been issued by the Council too late to comply with the requirements of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations. Claim and appeal to Court of Appeal dismissed.
- Kinnersley v Maidstone Borough Council – acting for the Claimant/Appellant – his judicial review of the grant of planning permission succeeded at appeal, the Court of Appeal holding that the Council’s interpretation of its development plan policy on the development of brownfield land was flawed.
- Conducting an investigation for a local authority into an alleged breach by one of its Councillors of the Members Code of Conduct.
- Platt v Caerphilly County Borough Council – acting for the Claimant – two successive applications for judicial review of decisions (1) to grant planning permission, and subsequent consent, for a waste disposal installation; and (2) to permit alterations to the permitted development. The issues included the meaning and effect of Schedule 1 part 10 of the EIA Regulations; and the scope of a non-material amendment to planning permission as provided for by section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
- Russell v Transport for London – for TfL – claim for compensation under the 1973 Act, following highways works to the Archway Gyratory in London. The Lands Chamber hearing, including cross examination on expert evidence and fact, was conducted remotely.
- Planning appeal for Broadland District Council: Racecourse Plantations, Norwich (6-day inquiry) – 300 dwellings and a new Community Woodland Park on land designated as a county wildlife site. Main issues: impact on biodiversity; scope of planning obligations.
- Council for the Protection of Rural Wales v Welsh Ministers – for CPRW – statutory review (under s.288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) of the Hendy Windfarm appeal decision.
- Objector to the Viking Link CPO Inquiry – for the Canal and River Trust – seeking binding reassurance that the construction of underground cables across the line of a river would not affect its environmental quality or its use by those with navigation rights. Settled objection on agreed terms.
- Planning appeal for Powys County Council: Hendy Windfarm, Llandegley (8-day inquiry) 7 turbine windfarm with 17.5 MW capacity with access over common land and significantly harmful landscape and heritage impact (scheduled ancient monuments particularly).
- Village Green Inquiry: Llanerch Fields, Llanelli, Carmarthenshire. For landowner and objector to the application for registration.
- Planning appeal for East Suffolk Council: Bell Lane, Ipswich (4-day inquiry). Main issues: housing land supply; Development Plan policy and strategy.
- Compulsory Purchase Order for London Borough of Camden: London Borough of Camden (Bacton Low Rise) CPO 2015. Promoting the CPO at inquiry. Related High Court challenge by the sole objector, Kuznetsov v SSCLG and London Borough of Camden.
- R (Chetwynd) v South Norfolk Council and others – for South Norfolk and others – misfeasance in public office, for the Defendants. Claim ruled totally without merit.
- Planning appeal for East Suffolk Council: Candlet Road, Felixstowe (SoS decision). Major residential-led mixed-use development. Main issues: housing land supply; landscape impact; infrastructure provision.
Services
Harriet offers the full range of services of any independent barrister, namely:
- The provision of legal advice.
- Strategic and tactical advice on procedure and the conduct of contentious cases.
- Advocacy in courts and tribunals in England and Wales
In addition:
- Harriet regularly speaks at conferences and seminars, in person and remote.
- Harriet provides professional training on all areas within her areas of expertise.
- Harriet is a trained mediator with experience of acting both as mediator and advocate in mediations.
Harriet is a registered Public Access barrister: this means clients may not need to instruct an intermediary in order to work with Harriet. Before accepting direct instructions, Harriet reviews the scope of the work required and its suitability for a direct access instruction. No fees are charged until a bespoke agreement is reached as to the scope of work required and related fees (this is often called a client care letter) .

Naturally, a proportion of Harriet’s work over the past few years is either confidential or incomplete. For specific advice on Harriet’s experience please contact the clerking team in chambers for advice.
Education
- BSc (Hons) in Mathematics and Economics, 1st Class, 1988
- Called to the Bar: Middle Temple, 1992
- Mediation training with Clerksroom 2009
Publications
Notable Cases
Events