Matt has a broad practice spanning the full range of chambers’ public law work, property, and commercial and regulatory litigation. He is the ideal barrister to advise in cases involving elements of commercial, property and public law.
Matt has several decades of experience in appearing before the High Court in both judicial reviews and commercial trials, as well as of appellate advocacy, including at the highest level.
Recent public law cases include Supreme Court briefs in R(Z) v Hackney, McDonald v McDonald, Hotak v Southwark and R(N) v Lewisham. He also appeared in the CJEU in R(Hemming) v Westminster. Matt has appeared before the Court of Appeal on dozens of occasions.
Recent trial work includes Rail for London v Hackney, a landlord and tenant dispute in the Chancery Division about the construction of a rent covenant, implied terms and estoppel by convention, Chalfont St Peter v Holy Cross, a claim in unlawful interference/unlawful means conspiracy arising out of alleged planning fraud, Southwark v London District Housing Association & ors, a multi-party claim for breach/evasion of planning obligations and the Building Act arbitration following the Supreme Court decision in Manolete Partners v Hastings.
He frequently acts for or against the government as well as in disputes between private individuals and organisations, often in the development sector, and has a keen understanding of his clients’ commercial and strategic aims.
Matt is very active across the social housing sector, providing strategic advice to many London boroughs, particularly in the areas of regeneration, property, homelessness, and housing.
A significant part of Matt’s practice relates to highways and traffic management.
Matt offers advice that is strategic, practical and realistic.
In June 2016 Matt was appointed Junior Counsel to the Crown – A Panel.
His appointment to A Panel ceased on being appointed QC in February 2017.
Expertise
- Property
Many of Matt’s cases are about property or have a property law element.
Matt combines both depth and breadth of knowledge, covering the full range of chambers’ Property work, including:
- landlord and tenant (both residential and commercial)
- real property
- development sites affected by easements, restrictive covenants and access issues
- trusts
- equitable remedies
- conveyancing disputes
- contested CPOs and CPO compensation
- planning enforcement
- property-related contracts and torts
- property-related professional negligence
Matt’s recent caseload includes:
- Manolete Partners v Hastings: 9 day Building Act arbitration following Supreme Court decision involving expert engineers, valuers and accountants. £20m claim for loss of business due to closure of Hastings Pier. Ex turpi causa defence based on breach of Health and Safety legislation. Loss of business claim rejected by arbitrator.
- Chester Road and Balmore Street: defending threatened group litigation by 50 leaseholders in respect of construction defects. No proceedings brought.
- Bacton Low Rise Estate: advice and representation in relation to nuisance, derogation from grant and contested CPO in respect of major residential development. CPO challenges dismissed and possession of development site obtained.
- Southwark v London District Housing Association & ors: multi-party claim for breach of planning obligations. Avoidance scheme, sham transactions and economic tort. Listed for 15 day trial in Ch D. Claims in respect of three sites settled, with defendants transferring 17 flats back into affordable housing use at no cost to Matt’s client. Claim at fourth site settled: 15 leaseholders and 5 banks conceded Matt’s client’s claim, with the result that 9 further flats were returned into affordable housing use.
- Advising Camden in relation to threatened claims arising out of defective cladding at the Chalcots Estate. No claims issued.
- Fevore Group v Network Rail: nuisance claim arising out of diesel contamination of commercial premises involving expert engineers and valuers. Settled after exchange of expert reports on terms that Network Rail purchased the contaminated land.
- Saul Construction v Hemsworth: defended claim for specific performance of contract for sale of sports centre on ground of rescission under multiple notices to complete. Claim settled on favourable terms at mediation.
- Rail for London v Hackney: dispute about interpretation of rent provisions in commercial lease for 99/125 years worth c.£2m per annum. Interpretation of rent covenant, implied terms and estoppel by convention. The Chancery Division trial took place in October 2022.
- St Anne’s House Man. Co. Ltd v TfL: defending claim for ransom value of a strip of land blocking the rear exit to the Elizabeth Line station at Tottenham Court Road, allegedly omitted from GVD under the Crossrail Act 2008.
- Alil Industrial Ltd v Jam Factory Freehold Ltd: defending claim for an injunction prohibiting and damages in respect of residents’ use of bin store on the basis that the claim arose out of a breach of planning control. Settled on terms that the claimant granted a lease of the bin store.
- East Ham Regeneration Ltd v David Wilson Homes Ltd: claim for £1.3m rights of light payment under overage deed; interpretation of “residential development”.
- Rail for London v Urban Edge Group Ltd: claim to rectify an agreement settling compensation claim in respect of land CPO’d for the East London Line Extension.
- AHGR Ltd v Marsh: defending claims for declarations of breaches of user covenants in three long leases of live-work units in Southwark and negotiation damages; security for costs.
- Received Wisdom02 May 2023
- Matt and Jenny aim for Supreme three in a row01 Jan 2018
- R (CN) v Lewisham LBC: Court of Appeal to consider whether Article 8 requires court order to evict homeless applicants01 Jan 2018
- High Court considers how evidence seeking to establish precise boundaries using datum points should be assessed in boundary dispute01 Jan 2018
- Landlord defends £1m claim for damages arising out of fire in restaurant01 Jan 2018
- Lewisham, Newham and Cornerstone team win in Supreme Court01 Jan 2018
- CN V LB Lewisham And ZH V LB Newham01 Jan 2018
- Supreme Court to hear homelessness challenge01 Jan 2018
- Tiensia v Vision Enterprises Ltd (t/a Universal Estates)01 Jan 2018
- Article 8 does not require possession proceedings in respect of interim temporary accommodation01 Jan 2018
- Supreme Court to consider whether possession proceedings required for Part 7 temporary accommodation01 Jan 2018
- Redress for abuse of the planning system01 Jan 2018
- Southwark Gets Tough on Affordable Housing Pledges01 Jan 2018
- Southwark Gets Tough on Affordable Housing Pledges Again01 Jan 2018
- Matthew Hutchings of Cornerstone Barristers appointed to Junior Counsel to the Crown A Panel01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Barristers announces three new silks01 Jan 2018
- No Proportionality Assessment in Private Sector Possession Claims01 Jan 2018
- Property Law Journal – Enforcement of Planning Obligations01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Housing Newsletter – October 201501 Jan 2018
- Public Law and Judicial Review
Matt advises local authorities on major projects, such as the High Road West housing development in Tottenham, and the West End Project traffic scheme in Bloomsbury.
He is very active across the social housing sector, providing strategic advice to many London boroughs, particularly in the areas of regeneration, property, homelessness and housing.
A significant part of Matt’s practice relates to highways and traffic management.
He also represents his clients in high profile litigation over a wide range of local government functions and legal issues, from public law to contract law, as illustrated by his recent reported cases.
Supreme Court
- R(N) v Lewisham and R(H) v Newham: article 8 and eviction without due process
- Hotak v Southwark: meaning of “vulnerable”
- McDonald v McDonald: Human Rights horizontality
- R(Z) v Hackney: first Supreme Court case on positive action under the Equality Act
Court of Justice of the EU
- R(Hemming) v Westminster: Services Directive and licensing
Court of Appeal
- R(Davey) v Cambridge: correct approach to interim injunction in Aarhus claim
- R(HA) v Ealing: indirect discrimination arising out of working household priority
- R(Z) v Hackney: positive action under the Equality Act and housing allocation
- R (Burns) v Winchester: defending challenge to decision to enter into agreement for lease of open space: permission to proceed refused with costs
- Hodge v Folkestone & Hythe: meaning of “accommodation” under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and whether it includes “move on” temporary accommodation
High Court
- R(Kensington & Chelsea) v Ealing: JR of refusal of homelessness local connection referral
- Southwark v London District Housing Association: claim in Chancery Division, issues included whether s.106 TCPA authorises restrictions on dispositions of land
- Dacorum v Bucknell: at what point does accommodation for the homeless become “let as a dwelling”?
- Kuznetsov & Braginzuk LLC v DCLG and LB Camden: successfully defended challenges to CPO and GVD in respect of major residential development
- Imperial London Hotels v Camden: successfully defended challenge to Bloomsbury traffic order
- Waltham Forest v Redbridge: represented local authority in successful mediation about liability for costs of care c.£1m
- Aspire Luxury Homes v Hart DC: successfully defended strike out of Part 7 claim seeking declarations in relation to s.106 agreement
- R(Mallon-Montero) v Lewisham: whether residence rule in housing allocation scheme offends reasonable preference duty: High Court Judge upheld scheme, holding that a previous High Court decision on the reasonable preference duty was incorrect.
- UTAG & LTDA v Camden: defending challenge to traffic order restricting licensed taxis’ use of Tottenham Court Road: after service of Camden’s evidence, the claim was discontinued with costs; the traffic orders remain in force
- No preference is a reasonable preference – R (Mallon Montero) v London Borough of Lewisham25 May 2021
- Positive News for Positive Action16 Oct 2020
- Red light to litigation gives green light to Camden cyclists27 Mar 2020
- Supreme Court to hear case about charities exemption and positive action as defences to direct discrimination in the allocation of social housing10 Dec 2019
- Hemming – Supreme Court Judgment Answers Questions And Raises Others01 Jan 2018
- Matt and Jenny aim for Supreme three in a row01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone note Supreme Court homelessness judgment01 Jan 2018
- R(Powell) v Brighton Marina Co Ltd [2014] EWHC 2136 (Admin)01 Jan 2018
- New Law Journal – Supreme Court broadens meaning of “vulnerable”01 Jan 2018
- Hines v Lambeth LBC [2014] EWCA Civ 660; Times June 19, 2014, CA01 Jan 2018
- R (CN) v Lewisham LBC: Court of Appeal to consider whether Article 8 requires court order to evict homeless applicants01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Double Triple Whammy at Supreme Court Today01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Trio in Supreme Court Triple Whammy01 Jan 2018
- CN V LB Lewisham And ZH V LB Newham01 Jan 2018
- Lifelong ASBO01 Jan 2018
- Lewisham, Newham and Cornerstone team win in Supreme Court01 Jan 2018
- R (Siwak) v LB Newham [2012] EWHC 1520 (Admin); [2012] EqLR 670, QBD01 Jan 2018
- R(Powell) V Brighton Marina Company Ltd & Ors01 Jan 2018
- Supreme Court to hear homelessness challenge01 Jan 2018
- R(Weaver) v L&Q [2010] 1 WLR 363; [2010] PTSR 1; [2009] 4 All ER 865; [2009] HRLR 29; [2009] UKHRR 1371; [2009] HLR 40; [2009] BLGR 96201 Jan 2018
- R (Tiller) v East Sussex County Council [2011] EWHC 3077 (Admin) well [2011] & EWCA Civ 1577; [2012] EqLR 265, CA01 Jan 2018
- Local authority challenged on cuts to legal advice services01 Jan 2018
- Solihull v Hickin and Thurrock v West in action: Article 8 and “second successors”01 Jan 2018
- Article 8 does not require possession proceedings in respect of interim temporary accommodation01 Jan 2018
- PM announces stop to “soft touch” approach to housing and benefits for immigrants01 Jan 2018
- Supreme Court to consider whether possession proceedings required for Part 7 temporary accommodation01 Jan 2018
- Court of Appeal confirms limited power of county court in s.204 appeals01 Jan 2018
- Court of Justice finds in favour of sex shops01 Jan 2018
- Kensington and Chelsea wins homelessness dispute with Ealing01 Jan 2018
- Redress for abuse of the planning system01 Jan 2018
- Southwark Gets Tough on Affordable Housing Pledges01 Jan 2018
- Accommodation approved by probation officer not the same as prison01 Jan 2018
- Southwark Gets Tough on Affordable Housing Pledges Again01 Jan 2018
- Victory for local democracy: High Court Judge “stepped over the line” when quashing working household priority scheme01 Jan 2018
- HHJ Luba QC upholds out of London discharge of duty01 Jan 2018
- High Court Judge Refuses Permission for Sex Offender’s Challenge01 Jan 2018
- Camden successfully defends CPO of Bacton Low Rise Estate01 Jan 2018
- Positive Action and Social Housing07 Jul 2020
- Is housing allocation “within the ambit” of article 8?27 Sep 2018
- Judicial Review – Delegation of Functions – Principles and Recent Perspectives01 Jan 2018
- Matthew Hutchings of Cornerstone Barristers appointed to Junior Counsel to the Crown A Panel01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone and Gosschalks team in Court of Justice of the European Union01 Jan 2018
- Journal of Housing Law – Haile v Waltham Forest LBC01 Jan 2018
- Silk Day 201701 Jan 2018
- Judical Review – The Right to Respect for the Home: Privacy’s Poor Relation?01 Jan 2018
- Inside Housing – High Court orders leaseholders to sell affordable housing back to council01 Jan 2018
- No Proportionality Assessment in Private Sector Possession Claims01 Jan 2018
- Matt Hutchings QC speaks about housing law and policy on BBC Radio 401 Jan 2018
- Property Law Journal – Enforcement of Planning Obligations01 Jan 2018
- Parliamentary Inquiry into Prostitution01 Jan 2018
- New Pan London Adult Safeguarding Policy Launched01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Barristers awarded tender for adult safeguarding legal review01 Jan 2018
- Local Government Lawyer: Supreme Court upholds challenge to council decision on intentional homelessness01 Jan 2018
- The Guardian – UK homeless no longer have to take ‘almost impossible’ accommodation test01 Jan 2018
- Local Government Lawyer: The Supreme Court on vulnerability01 Jan 2018
- Solicitors Journal – No such thing as an ‘ordinary homeless person’01 Jan 2018
- Practical Law – Hemming and others v Westminster City Council01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Barristers announces three new silks01 Jan 2018
- Haile V London Borough of Waltham Forest [2015] UKSC 3401 Jan 2018
- The Justice Gap: Supreme Court ruling to protect single homeless people01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Housing Newsletter – May 201601 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Housing Day 2015 – Presentations01 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Housing Newsletter – October 201501 Jan 2018
- Cornerstone Barristers Housing Newsletter – July 201501 Jan 2018
- Commercial and Regulatory
Matt has several decades of experience in commercial litigation, including contested applications for the full range of interim remedies, such as injunctions, freezing orders, search orders and security for costs. He relishes the challenges of High Court trials. He regularly advises on a wide variety of commercial disputes, procurement and commercial JRs.
His recent caseload includes:
- Manolete Partners v Hastings: 9 day Building Act arbitration following Supreme Court decision involving expert engineers, valuers and accountants. £20m claim for loss of business due to closure of Hastings Pier rejected by arbitrator.
- Southwark v London District Housing Association & ors: multi-party claim for breach of planning obligations. Avoidance scheme, sham transactions and economic tort. Listed for 15 day trial in Ch D. Claims in respect of three sites settled, with defendants transferring 17 flats back into affordable housing use at no cost to Matt’s client. Claim at fourth site settled: 15 leaseholders and 5 banks conceded Matt’s client’s claim, with the result that 9 further flats were returned into affordable housing use.
- Merthyr Tydfil v Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd: successfully obtained summary judgment for £6m in respect of monies to be paid into escrow account and successfully defended appeal to Court of Appeal.
- Representing firm of solicitors in claim for breach of fiduciary duties against former partner; successfully obtained worldwide freezing order. Successful mediation of knowing receipt claim against wife of the former partner in the firm.
- Received Wisdom02 May 2023
- Mining for meaning08 May 2019
- Judge finds that open cast mine case is open and shut27 Jun 2018
- LB Southwark v Connor & ors [2011] EWHC 685, [2012] Env LR 1, QBD01 Jan 2018
- Landlord defends £1m claim for damages arising out of fire in restaurant01 Jan 2018
- $1.9 million damages awarded to Matt Hutchings’s client in commercial claim01 Jan 2018
- Virulite LLC v Virulite Distribution Ltd & or [2014] EWHC 366 (QB), QBD01 Jan 2018
- Southwark Gets Tough on Affordable Housing Pledges01 Jan 2018
- Redress for abuse of the planning system01 Jan 2018
- Southwark Gets Tough on Affordable Housing Pledges Again01 Jan 2018