Permission was granted on appeal for a housing scheme in the
absence of a five year housing land supply (HLS). The Inspector
applied NPPF49 (which engages the NPPF14 presumption in the absence
of a 5 year HLS). The presumption recommends approval where there
is no 5 year HLS, unless "the adverse impact of doing so
would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, ... or
specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be
restricted." That includes where the plan has only
recently been adopted (
Woodcock Holdings Limited v Secretary of State for Communities
and Local Government and Anor  EWHC 1173 (Admin)).
NPPF126 to 134 provide specific policies on designated heritage
assets. NPPF134 requires less than substantial harm "to be
weighed against the public benefits of the
The scheme was acknowledged to cause 'less than
substantial' harm to the character and appearance of a nearby
Grade II listed farmhouse. The Inspector treated that harm as
outweighed by the overall public benefits. The authority's
grounds of challenge under section 288 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990 included that he had wrongly applied the
presumption, by failing to treat NPPF134 as a policy indicating
that development 'should be restricted'.
Coulson J held that NPPF134 is a policy "restricting
development" (despite the fact that it does not contain a
restriction), interpreting that phrase broadly. With the
presumption disengaged, an "unweighted" cost-benefit
balancing exercise must be undertaken.
The finding of harm (regardless of whether it is
"substantial" for NPPF purposes) gives rise to a
statutory, albeit rebuttable, presumption against the grant of
consent (South Lakeland District Council v Secretary of State
for the Environment and Another  2 AC 141) being
outweighed by material considerations. Applying the first,
weighted, limb on its own meant that it was likely that the wider
statutory presumption of refusal where there is any harm to
designated heritage assets had been lost.
There is likely to be a broadening of the search for
'restrictive' policies in defending refusals. That said,
where the decision taker has concluded that there is inadequate HLS
and the overarching legal hurdle to approving less than substantial
harm has been cleared, it should ultimately make little difference
to the outcome.
Dentons is the world's first polycentric global law firm. A
top 20 firm on the Acritas 2015 Global Elite Brand Index, the Firm
is committed to challenging the status quo in delivering consistent
and uncompromising quality and value in new and inventive ways.
Driven to provide clients a competitive edge, and connected to the
communities where its clients want to do business, Dentons knows
that understanding local cultures is crucial to successfully
completing a deal, resolving a dispute or solving a business
challenge. Now the world's largest law firm, Dentons'
global team builds agile, tailored solutions to meet the local,
national and global needs of private and public clients of any size
in more than 125 locations serving 50-plus countries.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
You are cordially invited to our workshop on processing of employees’ personal data in light of the new EU Regulation on Personal Data Protection (GDPR). The meeting is organized by Dentons together with the American Chamber of Commerce in Poland.
Dentons will hold a Competition Breakfast Seminar on February 28, 2017 titled: Rebates and discounts under EU competition law – lessons of the Intel case. Renowned competition lawyer James Venit from Dentons’ Brussels office will be joining co-heads Tihamér Tóth and Tünde Gönczöl of Dentons Budapest’s
You are cordially invited to a practical seminar on private antitrust enforcement in light of the soon to be implemented Damages Directive, which we address to the banking and finance sector. During the seminar we will present new tools designed for cartel damages litigation in light of fast forwarding the legislative process in Poland from a lawyer’s and an economist’s perspective. We will discuss examples of private antitrust litigation from a jurisdiction where the system is already effective and consider whether third party litigation funding is an option in Poland. All these points will help you identify potential claims against other market players and prepare a defense strategy against private enforcement claims targeting your institution.
The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) decided that the costs of claims consultants assisting in adjudication enforcement proceedings can be recovered as disbursements, assuming that those consultants acted in the adjudication.
The requirements of a valid payment notice issued under a construction contract were considered in a previous update: "A Payment Notice? Be Clear?" with reference to the case of Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust v Logan Construction (South East) Ltd  ("Surrey and Sussex") a decision of the English High Court.
VL's appeal was against a decision by LBC on a review of an earlier refusal to provide VL and her family with housing on the grounds that she was not homeless, or threatened with homelessness, finding she had accommodation available to her in Portugal.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).