Antonia has a strong background in local government, having spent six years as a solicitor working for district and county councils advising on all aspects of planning, highways, rights of way, town and village green matters and CPOs. She has a particularly strong background in planning litigation having originally qualified as a litigation solicitor and spending five years in private practice.
Her expertise includes judicial review and statutory challenges, compulsory purchase orders (CPOs), highways, rights of way, town and village greens and assets of community value.
Antonia has advised public and private clients on a range of issues including challenging local planning authorities either in relation to the planning process itself or at Examination in Public (EIP) contesting the soundness of local plans.
She is a member of the Law Society’s Planning Panel as well as being a Legal Associate of The Royal Town Planning Institute. She is also a contributor to the Local Government Lawyer and presents to members of the RTPI.
- R (on the application of Trustees of the Cecil Estate Trust) v South Kesteven District Council . This successful application focused on the issue of development, listed buildings and their settings
- On an unreported application for judicial review to quash the decision of the local authority to issue 3 enforcement notices. The application was successful and the notices withdrawn. 
- In the case of Brown v Carlisle City Council  EWHC 707 Admin. This application for judicial review included an application for disclosure which is a rare in judicial review proceedings. The application for disclosure was successful as was the Claimant at the substantive hearing which lasted 3 days in the High Court in London
- On the timing of a challenge a draft core strategy which included arguments seeking the Court’s intervention at a stage prior to the core strategy being adopted by the local planning authority. Please see the reported case of the Manydown Company Limited v Basingstoke and Dene Borough Council  EWHC 977 Admin
- The claimant in the Court of Appeal in the matter of Brown v Carlisle City Council and others  EWHC 523. The claim successfully challenged the way the local planning authority had applied the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations in respect of cumulative impacts of the proposed development. This matter, is the first known case where Counsel had to appear by way of video link. Counsel was prevented from returning in time for the Court of Appeal hearing as flights were delayed or cancelled as a result of the volcanic ash cloud. In less than 3 days before the hearing, Antonia obtained agreement from the Court of Appeal that the matter could go ahead with Counsel addressing the court from South Africa and a junior to present in the Court of Appeal in London
- Advising an acquiring authority in respect of a class action brought before the (Upper Tribunal) Lands Chamber where valuations were contested by over 50 landowners of over 70 properties as part of a large housing regeneration scheme within the borough.
- Durham University in respect of draft local plan and in particular presenting arguments at the EIP that the local plan needed a separate and new policy to be included. The Inspector agreed with the arguments put forward and required the local planning authority to engage with objectors and prepared draft policy for consideration
- A social housing group on a CPO matter which included a threatened injunction against the acquiring authority which had in error prevented access to the client’s land. Further negotiations took place and an increased valuation for the client was achieved.
"Antonia Murillo regularly acts on contentious matters and is experienced in various areas, including public rights of way, village greens and assets of community value. She also frequently advises clients on judicial review proceedings. One impressed source notes: "She is very thorough, personable and gets on very well with clients.""
"She is very thorough, personable and gets on very well with clients" and she is "highly recommended’, particularly for planning litigation, and noted as ‘combining her extensive knowledge with a commercial perspective".