Wiltshire Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2026] EWHC 463 (Admin) (03 March 2026)

Wiltshire Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2026] EWHC 463 (Admin) (03 March 2026)

A subsequent event, such as fire damage to a heritage asset occurring after a planning inspector's decision, does not constitute a mistake of fact or external injustice capable of vitiating the decision under section 288 TCPA 1990. The Inspector's decision was lawful on the facts as they existed at the time, and statutory planning procedures provide an adequate mechanism to address changes in circumstances.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 463 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Wiltshire Council; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Old Sarum Airfield Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Planning Statutory Review Under Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment on Application to Quash Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Application for planning statutory review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Statutory Review, Mistake of Fact, External Injustice, Listed Building Consent, Planning Permission, Heritage Assets, Judicial Review Grounds
Administrative Law Planning Law Statutory Review Mistake of Fact External Injustice Listed Building Consent Planning Permission Heritage Assets +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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wiltshire Council

Claimant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Old Sarum Airfield Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Planning Statutory Review Under Section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / High Court Judgment on Application to Quash Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a subsequent fire damaging a heritage asset after a planning inspector's decision constitutes a mistake of fact or external injustice sufficient to quash the decision under section 288 TCPA 1990
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector's decision was vitiated by a material change in circumstances or unfairness

Ratio Decidendi

A subsequent event, such as fire damage to a heritage asset occurring after a planning inspector's decision, does not constitute a mistake of fact or external injustice capable of vitiating the decision under section 288 TCPA 1990. The Inspector's decision was lawful on the facts as they existed at the time, and statutory planning procedures provide an adequate mechanism to address changes in circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for planning statutory review dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay First Defendant's costs in the sum of £18,512.80.
  • Second Defendant entitled to a costs order; costs to be subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.