Yet again the courts are required to step in a to clarify the mean of the ‘much simplified’ NPPF, because another court had got it wrong. Working a treat at making the planning system easier and capable of delivering the increased housing we need isn’t it?
The Court of Appeal has today handed down judgment in the East Staffordshire Borough Council v Barwood Land II LLP appeal. The Court upheld the judgment of the High Court which quashed an inspector’s decision on the basis that he wrongly treated the presumption in favour of sustainable development as applying despite having accepted that the local planning authority could demonstrate a five year supply and there was no other relevant deficiency in the development plan (i.e. it was not absent, silent and relevant policies were not out of date for any other reason). The Court of Appeal has therefore definitively confirmed that the benefit of the presumption can only be obtained in the circumstances defined by NPPF para.14 and that Mr. Justice Coulson’s view to the contrary in Wychavon District Council v SSCLG is wrong. The Court also took the opportunity to explain the operation of NPPF para.14 more generally…
View original post 52 more words
Roger Gambba-Jones 