Ryan Kohli

> People > Barristers > Ryan Kohli

Ryan is a leading public law practitioner with particular expertise in planning and environmental law and social housing.

He has been consistently ranked as a leading practitioner by the Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 directories of highly rated barristers and has been appointed by the Attorney General as Junior Counsel to the Crown (B Panel).

Ryan is a versatile public law practitioner and is adept at handling complex cases across the public law spectrum. He has acted in significant cases in each of his core practice areas.

In the property/social housing sphere, he acts for registered providers of social housing, central government departments, the Regulator of Social Housing and local authorities. He has appeared in leading cases concerning the application of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and s. 15 of the Equality Act 2010. Examples include Paragon Asra Housing Limited v Neville [2018] EWCA Civ 1712; Hackney LBC v Haque [2017] EWCA Civ 4 and Thurrock Borough Council v West [2012] EWCA Civ 1435.

In the area of administrative and public law he has extensive experience representing central government departments and local authorities in public law proceedings including a leading case on the meaning of “clearly unfounded” in the asylum context in R (on the application of FR Albania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 605.

In planning, he regularly represents clients in significant planning cases including those concerning air quality and the interpretation of the General Permitted Development Order. Recent examples include R (on the application of Shirley) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 2306 (Admin) and Arnold v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWCA Civ 231.

Expertise

Planning and Environment
Ryan’s practice is predominantly focused on judicial review and statutory appeals in the area of planning and environmental law. He has been appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown by the Attorney General (‘B Panel’) and is regularly instructed on behalf of the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government as well as private developers on planning matters in the High Court and beyond.

Ryan has conducted numerous public inquiries on behalf of local planning and highway authorities and has advised on a wide range of planning issues. He recently advised the Department for Transport in relation to air quality matters arising from the proposed Silvertown Tunnel Development Consent Order.

Examples of higher court work include:

R (on the application of Shirley) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 2306 (Admin)

Led by James Maurici QC, Ryan acted for the Secretary of State in defending his decision not to call in the proposal to grant planning permission for the South Canterbury Urban Extension which comprised up to 4000 homes and associated development including a new hospital and school. The case concerned the adequacy of the UK government’s implementation of the Air Quality Directive and whether, in light of evidence about adverse impacts on air quality, the Secretary of State’s status as ‘competent authority’ for the purposes of the Directive mandated a call-in. In a detailed Judgment, Dove J agreed with the Secretary of State that (i) the Secretary of State’s designation as a competent authority did not impose a duty to call in planning applications which may have an adverse impact on air quality; (ii) the discretion as to whether to call in a planning application was very broad and pre-eminently a matter of planning judgment for the Secretary of State; and (iii) the call-in power of the Secretary of State was not a mechanism of supervisory control over local planning authority decision making.

Arnold v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWCA Civ 231

Ryan acted on behalf of the Secretary of State as sole Counsel in the High Court and Court of Appeal in defending a s. 289 challenge to the decision of a planning inspector to uphold an enforcement notice requiring the demolition of an unlawfully constructed dwelling on the green belt. The case concerned, inter alia, the adequacy of the inspector’s consideration of alternative schemes under Ground F and whether PD rights, once implemented under Class A, can survive the demolition of the dwellinghouse.

R (on the application of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2016] EWHC 703 (Admin); [2015] EWHC 2458 (Admin)

Led by Philip Coppel QC, Ryan acted for the Secretary of State in two statutory appeals defending challenges brought under s. 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The cases turned, respectively, on the application of RBKC’s recently adopted basement policy and the correct approach to Paragraph A.1(f) of the GPDO.

Fuller v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] EWHC 142 (Admin)

Ryan acted on behalf of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in defending the grant of planning permission to develop a site near a tree with amenity value on a residential street. The Court upheld the inspector’s conclusion that the tree provided amenity value, but that it was not an outstanding or unique specimen, and that the benefit of the proposed development would override any harm to the tree.
- Cornerstone Planning Day 2021 – Tickets available20 Sep 2021
Housing
Ryan is a leading social housing practitioner and is regularly instructed in complex and high profile social housing litigation. He has been appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown by the Attorney General (‘B Panel’) and has been consistently listed as a leading junior in this area by Chambers UK and Legal 500.

He acts for local authorities, registered providers, the Regulator of Social Housing and private landlords in a range of matters from possession proceedings to strategic advice on dealing with anti-social tenants, succession, right-to-buy and policy matters.

Ryan is an experienced trial advocate and is adept at conducting and marshalling the full range of housing proceedings. He regularly provides advice and representation to registered providers and local authorities on all aspects of property and social housing including fire safety, Water Resale Orders, leasehold disputes (including service charges) and judicial review for breach of statutory duty. He has advised and represented successful Respondents in appeals against improvement notices, overcrowding notices and prohibition orders within the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).

He has also been instructed in leading cases in this practice area including:

Paragon Asra Housing Limited v Neville [2018] EWCA Civ 1712

As sole Counsel for the successful Appellant, Ryan acted in proceedings concerning the scope of the operation of ss. 15 and 35 of the Equality Act 2010 in applications to suspend a warrant for possession. Practical difficulties were frequently arising where suspended possession orders had been agreed between the parties and approved by the Court in respect of disabled tenants who would then proceed to breach the order. Legal representatives of disabled tenants wished, in those circumstances, to re-raise the Equality Act defences at the enforcement stage. The Court of Appeal agreed with Ryan’s submissions that (i) absent a material change of circumstances between the date of the SPO and the date of the hearing of the warrant suspension application it would be abusive to allow the tenant to re-raise such matters; and (ii) in any event a Judgment can, in principle, demonstrate compliance with the substance of the requirements of proportionality without explicitly considering the four-fold analysis highlighted by the Supreme Court in Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Community Housing Limited [2015] 2 WLR 721.

Hackney LBC v Haque [2017] EWCA Civ 7

Led by Kelvin Rutledge QC, Ryan acted for Hackney LBC in a case which established the standard expected of reviewing officers within their homelessness review decision letters before it could be said that they had complied with the Public Sector Equality Duty under s. 149 of the Equality Act 2010. The decision provides helpful and timely guidance as to how homelessness decision-makers should approach the PSED in suitability cases following the decision of the Supreme Court in Hotak v LB Southwark & Associated Appeals [2016] AC 811.

Thurrock Borough Council v West [2012] EWCA Civ 1435

Ryan was sole Counsel for the successful Appellant in the Court of Appeal in this seminal authority on the scope of Article 8 defences in claims for possession. Mr West raised an Article 8 defence to possession proceedings brought by the local authority on the basis it would be disproportionate to evict him, his girlfriend and child from a property previously occupied by his grandparents, both of whom had deceased. As there had already been a single succession, there was no further entitlement in law to succeed to the tenancy. At the county court level, possession was refused on the basis that it was said it would be disproportionate to evict Mr West and his family who would, in all likelihood, be afforded priority need by the local authority in any future application for housing. The local authority appealed successfully to the Court of Appeal. Etherton LJ (with whom Hallett LJ and Dame Janet Smith agreed) determined that the county court Order, if allowed to stand, would effectively amount to an allocation of housing by the Court which was wholly outside of its remit.
- Case law update: R (on the application of JCWI) v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 54219 May 2020
- Cornerstone Housing Day 2015 – Presentations01 Jan 2018
Public Law and Judicial Review
Ryan has extensive experience representing central government departments and local authorities in public law proceedings. He has been appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown by the Attorney General (‘B Panel’) and is frequently instructed to defend central and local government against judicial review claims which concern the full spectrum of their vires.

Ryan’s planning and public sector housing work is also heavily public law focused. His practice covers wider government work and he has experience in applications to revoke Debt Relief Orders, cases relating to the laws of markets and fairs, and pursuing applications for liability orders for non-domestic rates. He has also been instructed by the HMRC in the Valuation Tribunal for England and the High Court on important cases concerning council tax. Ryan has represented local authorities in judicial review applications relating to non-domestic rates decisions including in R (on the application of Augustine Housing Trust) v Grays Magistrates’ Court [2011] EWHC 699.

He also has expertise in the Upper Tribunal, High Court and Court of Appeal in acting for the Secretary of State for the Home Department in judicial review applications in the field of immigration and unlawful detention. He has appeared on behalf of the Secretary of State in the following cases:

R (on the application of FR Albania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ 605

This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Upper Tribunal focused on the question of the definition of “clearly unfounded” asylum claims and s. 94(3) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

R (on the application of Rashidat) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, High Court, 4 November 2015

This claim for judicial review concerned whether the Secretary of State had correctly applied the “absence of ties” test within the Immigration Rules and her approach to the Claimant’s Article 8 rights. Ryan successfully defended the Secretary of State’s decision.

R (on the application of Neeraj Kumar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC Civ 652

On behalf of the Secretary of State, Ryan defeated the Claimant’s judicial review challenge against her decision to administratively remove him pursuant to s. 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. The case concerned whether the Secretary of State’s officers had correctly adhered to her Enforcement and Instruction Guidance.

R (on the application of R) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 2018

Ryan successfully defended the Claimant’s claim for judicial review which alleged, inter alia, that the Secretary of State’s policy on Humanitarian Protection was inconsistent with the Qualification Directive.
Licensing
- Overview
- News
Ryan has substantial experience in appearing before licensing committees in respect of premises license applications and in the magistrates’ courts in respect of licensing appeals.

He has experience in acting on behalf of local authorities in appeals against revocations of taxi licenses and has advised on the lawfulness of proposed new requirements for hackney carriages and private hire vehicles.

Ryan is also regularly instructed on behalf of local authorities (including the London Borough of Greenwich) to act as legal advisor to licensing committees in high profile licensing applications.
- Betting industry bracing over new government consultation on gambling01 Jan 2018
Commercial and Regulatory
- Overview
Ryan has experience in advising and representing clients in the commercial and regulatory sector. Specifically, he has:
- Advised landlords on the Telecommunications Code and in their negotiations with telecoms operators in respect of telecommunications equipment on the roofs of high rise buildings
- Drafted pleadings, advised and acted in commercial proceedings concerning breach of contract and claims in debt
- Acted in Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 proceedings in respect of renewal of commercial leases
- Advised and acted on behalf of parties in proceedings concerning the housing health and safety rating system, improvement notices and prohibition orders
- Appeared on behalf of OFCOM in prosecutions against pirate radio operators
Property
Ryan has undertaken a range of work in the property sector and has particular experience in:
- Representing parties in the First Tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal (Property Chamber) in proceedings concerning the liability to pay service charges and their reasonableness
- Advising on and acting in proceedings arising out of disputes under the Party Wall Act 1996
- Acting on behalf of parties in adverse possession proceedings
- Representing parties in negotiations concerning lease renewal under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954
- Advising on all leasehold matters including the effect of easements and restrictive covenants
- Advising and acting on behalf of parties in proceedings concerning the housing health and safety rating system, improvement notices and prohibition orders
- Property Week: How can leaseholders ensure local authorities fulfil their duties?26 Feb 2021

Ryan is an excellent advocate who is able to precisely dissect complex planning policies, matters, their context, and objective interpretation."
Chambers UK Bar (2022)
He is a great advocate and formidable at cross-examination."
Chambers UK Bar (2022)
He is an excellent property and housing barrister. He gets the best result every time."
Chambers UK Bar (2022)
He's incredibly impressive at getting his head around a complex case."
Chambers UK Bar (2022)

About Ryan

Directory Quotes
- Social Housing – “Ryan is a very careful, methodical and effective advocate. He is a bold advocate, not afraid to persist with difficult arguments even when facing a reluctant judiciary.” Legal 500 2022
- Social Housing – “He is an excellent property and housing barrister. He gets the best result every time.” “He’s incredibly impressive at getting his head around a complex case.” Chambers and Partners 2022
- Planning – “Ryan is an excellent advocate who is able to precisely dissect complex planning policies, matters, their context, and objective interpretation.” “He is a great advocate and formidable at cross-examination.” Chambers and Partners 2022
- Social Housing – “He demonstrates skills well beyond his year of call and has great authority in the courtroom.” Chambers and Partners 2021
- “Ryan is meticulous in his preparation and has a tremendous confidence, which he brings across in both his written work and advocacy.” Legal 500 2021
- “His technical knowledge and detail to issues is outstanding.” “He knows the area inside out.” Chambers and Partners 2020
- “He is really technically strong, really well prepared, very pleasant to deal with and has really good judgement.” “He is thorough and exacting in the advice he gives.” Chambers and Partners 2020
- “An excellent, up-and-coming barrister; he is well-prepared and attentive in court.” Legal 500 2020
- “An excellent property and housing barrister whose skills far exceed those of the average person of his year of call.” “He is very polished in his written and advocacy skills, and is a firm favourite of many clients.” Chambers and Partners 2019
- “He is straight down the line, robust and clear.” “He exhibits an acumen far above his year of call, he is never fazed by anything and is highly reliable.” Chambers and Partners 2019
- “Great at engaging with witnesses and putting clients at ease when in court.” The Legal 500 2018
- “Exceptional and highly accomplished.” “He demonstrates an ability way beyond his year of call, has a very good manner with clients and is a very authoritative presence in court.” Chambers and Partners 2018 (Planning)
- “He is very good on his feet and a difficult barrister to be against.” Chambers and Partners 2018 (Social Housing)
- “A robust and tenacious advocate, who is able to represent difficult positions.” Legal 500 2017
- “An impressive advocate who provides good skeleton arguments in complex cases.” “A very firm opponent.” Chambers and Partners 2017
- “Very succinct and gets to the point quickly. His written advice is very good and clients love him – he’s charming.” Chambers and Partners 2017
- “A very focused and smart guy who is also enjoyable to deal with.” “He is very clear and persuasive in the submissions he makes.” Chambers and Partners 2016
- “An effective oral advocate.” Legal 500 2016
- “He provides good, sound, commercial advice. He’s very personable and a favourite with clients.” Chambers and Partners 2016
- “He’s exemplary in terms of client care, trial preparation and advocacy skills – a polished service.” Chambers and Partners 2016
Appointments
- 2017: Junior Counsel to the Crown (Attorney General’s ‘B’ Panel)
- 2015: Panel Counsel to the Metropolitan Police
- 2012: Junior Counsel to the Crown (Attorney General’s ‘C’ Panel)
Education
- 2005-2006: Bar Vocational Course (BPTC) ranked in the ‘Outstanding’ category
- 2002-2005: MA (Jurisprudence) St Edmund Hall, University of Oxford
Publications
- The ‘New’ Forfeiture12 Mar 2021
- How can leaseholders ensure local authorities fulfil their duties?16 Feb 2021
Notable Cases
- REFEREE OR GOALKEEPER? The Court of Appeal decides…24 May 2021