Mead Realisations Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 32 (30 January 2025)

Mead Realisations Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 32 (30 January 2025)

The PPG guidance in paragraph 7-028 does not amend or override the NPPF policy in paragraph 162 but clarifies its meaning. The inspector lawfully applied the sequential test as clarified by the PPG, and properly assessed the weight and consistency of Policy CS3 with national policy. No public law error occurred.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 32
Parties
Appellant: Mead Realisations Limited; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: North Somerset Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Planning Statutory Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Appeal From High Court (king's Bench Division, Planning Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sequential Test, Flood Risk, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Planning Practice Guidance (ppg), Development Plan Policy, Material Considerations
Administrative Law Planning Law Sequential Test Flood Risk National Planning Policy Framework (nppf) Planning Practice Guidance (ppg) Development Plan Policy Material Considerations

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mead Realisations Limited

Appellant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

North Somerset Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Planning Statutory Review (section 288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / Appeal From High Court (king's Bench Division, Planning Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) can amend or elucidate the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
  2. 2 Whether the inspector lawfully applied the sequential test for flood risk in light of the PPG
  3. 3 Whether the criteria in Policy CS3 of the North Somerset Core Strategy are out-of-date due to inconsistency with the NPPF and PPG

Ratio Decidendi

The PPG guidance in paragraph 7-028 does not amend or override the NPPF policy in paragraph 162 but clarifies its meaning. The inspector lawfully applied the sequential test as clarified by the PPG, and properly assessed the weight and consistency of Policy CS3 with national policy. No public law error occurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The order of Holgate J. dismissing the claim for statutory review is upheld.
  • No planning permission granted for the proposed development at Lynchmead Farm.