High Court rejects residents’ bid to block Chipperfield’s plan for Chinese ‘super-embassy’

The High Court has rejected a bid to block David Chipperfield’s plans for a new Chinese Embassy next to the Tower of London.

Proposals were finally approved by the government in January after a years-long controversy centred on national security concerns. But the scheme was hit by a further setback in April, when local residents were granted a judicial review.

Following a hearing earlier this month, Justice Lieven handed down a judgement this morning (Friday), in which she rejected the residents’ claim on all grounds.

The Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association (RMCRA), which represents people living in roughly 100 homes, located on the site and owned by the Chinese government, has already stated its intention to appeal the decision.

The controversy over the historic Royal Mint site began after the Chinese government bought it for £255m back in 2018.

Plans were submitted to Tower Hamlets council in 2021 and rejected in 2022, before being re-submitted in identical form in 2024, at which point the scheme was called in by Angela Rayner, during her first stint as housing secretary.

The plans were sent to a public inquiry, with then-communities secretary Steve Reed eventually signing off plans in January 2026.

Opposition to the 20,000 sq m, which would be Europe’s largest embassy complex, had largely focused on its proximity to a key cable network carrying vast amounts of data to the City, as well as a series of unmarked rooms in the basement of the proposed buildings which would be positioned close to where the cables run past the site.

But following Reed’s approval, the RMCRA brought forward its legal challenge, arguing the decision failed to account for residents’ safety.

Lawyers for the residents have previously claimed that the government sought to influence the Metropolitan Police to withdraw their objection to the scheme, which had been made based on fears there would not be enough space in front of the proposed embassy to safely accommodate more than 100 protestors.

In her decision on Friday, Justice Lieven rejected arguments made by the residents’ lawyers that diplomatic immunity made planning conditions unenforceable and therefore unlawful.

She also dismissed claims that the planning permission breached residents’ rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and property, finding that that the claimants had failed to produce “reasonable and convincing evidence of the likelihood that a violation affecting them personally would occur” and describing their concerns as amounting to “suspicion and conjecture”.

Regarding the unmarked rooms in planning documents, the court ruled that deciding what information is “‘necessary’ to describe the development is plainly one for the decision-maker and not the court”, leaving the secretary of state’s decision standing.

She also described it as “wholly conventional for the use of individual rooms in a development not to be described” and that there was “no possible ambiguity as to the nature of the intended use of the premises” for embassy purposes.

Lieven’s decision was appended with a short supplementary judgement from Lord Justice Dingemans, senior president of tribunals, who said he was providing an opinion because it was “apparent” that the communities secretary’s decision had “caused real concern to the claimants, among others.”

He agreed that the claim should be dismissed, while stressing that “the function of this court is not to review the decision of the SSHCLG on the merits, but to carry out an audit of the legality of the decision making”.

Leigh Day partner Ricardo Gama, who represents RMCRA, said: “Our clients look forward to appealing this decision to the Court of Appeal. They believe that, as well as their human rights protections, important principles are at stake about diplomatic immunity.”

Chipperfield’s plans for the Royal Mint would see the grade II* listed Johnson Smirke Building refurbished as the main embassy building to host formal reception spaces and offices.

The grade II-listed Seaman’s Registry would also be refurbished under the scheme with various additions to both buildings, which were carried out as part of the mint’s redevelopment in the 1980s, due to be replaced.

Two linked blocks constructed as part of the 1980s redevelopment, Dexter House and Murray House, would be separated and reconfigured, with Murray House stripped back to its frame to create a new ceramic-clad cultural centre.