Caselaw from the last 12 months to take into consideration in 2026

1.        Planning authorities cannot revisit matters at detailed planning application stage that have already been approved at outline stage.

This is why LPAs and Councillors should engage from the outset… once the outline is granted, there is very little room for getting the “goodies” that you want. So, stop being NIMBYs and work with developers. Don’t come with crocodile tears afterwards! 

2.        The Court of Appeal endorsed a written ministerial statement (WMS) restricting the ability of councils to set higher energy-efficiency standards for new homes in plans than those in national regulations.

As laudable as it may be, the LPA is NOT the Government, and you have to act in accordance with the National legislation. Whether National legislation needs to be updated is a different matter all together!

3.        The Courts found an inspector was wrong to treat a whole site as previously developed Green Belt. Decision-makers should take into account different parts of sites in deciding whether green belt land is previously developed.

Just because a red line goes around a site doesn’t mean that it is all previously developed Green Belt! Some bits may very well be previously developed but some bits may not be. But that is where Grey Belt then come in. 

4.        There was no procedural unfairness by a council in allowing a proposed business park expansion on a protected landscape despite a local objector not speaking at the Planning Committee meeting where the decision was made.

Planning Committees are very important things. This is where things must be said and presented for determination by the Councillors. You HAVE to make your case. On this one it was an objector who thought someone else would speak for them… The same goes for applicants! YOU need to make the case to the committee and present them with the best and most complete set of facts. 

5.        A council was correct not to regard an alternative site as “available” in carrying out the sequential retail test because it was already committed to another operator.

This is a very important one! Just because someone locally think there is another site that would be “more appropriate” doesn’t mean it is able stop an application. If the land the locals would prefer is not available, then it is NOT AVAILABLE and it isn’t an argument to have your application refused. 

There are a few other ones too but this should give you enough food for thought for the first week back! 

Have a wonderful year and get in touch – we are here to help you get your ticket!