Ross v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2025] EWHC 1183 (Admin) (19 May 2025)

Ross v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2025] EWHC 1183 (Admin) (19 May 2025)

The Inspector did not err in law in his interpretation of EN-3 section 2.10.55 and footnote 92. Overplanting for purposes beyond module degradation, such as site maximisation and addressing STC rating, is not prohibited by EN-3 provided it is justified and impacts are assessed. The Inspector's planning balance and imposition of conditions were lawful and adequate. The claim is dismissed.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1183 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Lynn Ross; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Renewable Energy Systems LTD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of National Policy Statement EN 3, Overplanting in Solar Farm Developments, Threshold for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (nsip), Planning Conditions and Environmental Assessment, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions
Planning Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Interpretation of National Policy Statement EN 3 Overplanting in Solar Farm Developments Threshold for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (nsip) Planning Conditions and Environmental Assessment Judicial Review of Planning Decisions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynn Ross

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Renewable Energy Systems LTD

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper interpretation of EN-3 section 2.10.55 and footnote 92 regarding overplanting
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector's application of EN-3 was flawed
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector failed to address all material issues raised

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector did not err in law in his interpretation of EN-3 section 2.10.55 and footnote 92. Overplanting for purposes beyond module degradation, such as site maximisation and addressing STC rating, is not prohibited by EN-3 provided it is justified and impacts are assessed. The Inspector's planning balance and imposition of conditions were lawful and adequate. The claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim for judicial review is refused.
  • The Inspector's decision to grant planning permission for the Longhedge Solar Farm stands.