Launchbury v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Ors [2026] EWHC 109 (Admin) (23 January 2026)

Launchbury v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Ors [2026] EWHC 109 (Admin) (23 January 2026)

The claimant's challenge is a merits-based disagreement with the inspector's planning judgment. The inspector adequately considered all relevant matters, provided sufficient reasoning, and acted within her discretion. No irrationality or legal error is established.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 109 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Samuel David Launchbury; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Charmaine Davies; Third Defendant: Wychavon District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Statutory Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990 / Renewed Application for Permission
Outcome
Permission to bring statutory review refused
Legal Topics
Statutory Review, Planning Permission, Gypsy/traveller Sites, Biodiversity Net Gain, Landscape Impact, Flood Risk, Rationality Challenge
Administrative Law Planning Law Statutory Review Planning Permission Gypsy/traveller Sites Biodiversity Net Gain Landscape Impact Flood Risk +1 more

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel David Launchbury

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Charmaine Davies

Second Defendant

Wychavon District Council

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Statutory Review Under Section 288 TCPA 1990 / Renewed Application for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector's decision was irrational or inadequately reasoned
  2. 2 Compliance with statutory requirements for Biodiversity Net Gain
  3. 3 Adequacy of landscape and flood risk assessments

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's challenge is a merits-based disagreement with the inspector's planning judgment. The inspector adequately considered all relevant matters, provided sufficient reasoning, and acted within her discretion. No irrationality or legal error is established.

Court Disposition

Permission to bring statutory review refused

Orders

  • Costs order made by Deputy High Court Judge on 28 November 2025 upheld