Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal dismissed a planning judicial review appeal over a new household waste recycling centre, holding that alternative sites were adequately considered and no material factual error occurred.
Hilltop Experiences Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Norfolk County Council [2026] EWCA Civ 541 (06 May 2026)
Court of Appeal dismissed a planning judicial review challenge over a new household waste recycling centre, holding the alternatives assessment and officer report were not unlawful.
Sandy Park Farm Partnership v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Ors [2026] EWHC 422 (Admin) (26 February 2026)
The High Court dismissed a section 288 challenge to a planning appeal decision granting outline permission for 350 dwellings at Exeter, rejecting policy, weight, and habitats grounds.
Tesco Stores Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Lidl Great Britain Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 610 (09 May 2025)
The Court of Appeal dismissed Tesco’s challenge to planning permission for a Lidl store, holding the council lawfully applied the NPPF sequential test.
The High Court dismissed a challenge to a planning inspector’s decision granting permission for a rear extension in the New Forest National Park.
New Forest National Park Authority v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWHC 726 (Admin) (27 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed a section 288 challenge to a planning appeal decision to allow a rear extension at Badger Cottage in the New Forest National Park.
The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) did not amend or override the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) policy but clarified and elucidated its meaning. The inspector lawfully applied the sequential test as clarified by the PPG, and properly assessed the proposal's conflict with both national and local policy. There is no legal principle preventing the Secretary of State from adopting guidance in the PPG that clarifies or amends the NPPF. The appeal is dismissed as no public law error occurred.
Source excerpt
Mead Realisations Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 32 (30 January 2025)
The Court of Appeal upheld dismissal of a planning statutory review, holding that PPG guidance on the flood-risk sequential test lawfully clarified the NPPF.
The court held that the Inspectors correctly interpreted and applied the sequential test for flood risk under the NPPF and PPG. The PPG is a legitimate elucidation of the NPPF and may clarify its meaning. The sequential test is broad and allows for judgment and flexibility; it is not confined to the specific requirements of the developer's proposal. General need for development is not relevant to the sequential test but may be considered in the overall planning balance. The Inspectors did not err in law or fetter their discretion by treating the PPG as binding. The challenges were dismissed.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a planning judicial review over an outline permission for up to 205 homes at Hesmonds Stud, rejecting both policy and misleading-advice challenges.
Explore more
