Case law - NPPF’s presumption of sustainable development

5th May 2016


Related Topics

Related tags

  • Business & Industry ,
  • Built environment ,
  • Planning

Author

Camilla Bollington

A High Court ruling on the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

In Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Gladman Developments Ltd [2016], the High Court considered the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in para 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) where a competing policy restricting development applies.

Paragraph 14 imposes a presumption in favour of sustainable development if a development plan is absent or silent or if relevant policies are out of date. The presumption does not apply if: adverse impacts from granting consent significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits (so-called ‘limb 1’); or a specific policy in the NPPF indicates that development should be restricted (‘limb 2’). Paragraph 134 requires any harm that is less than substantial to the significance of a designated heritage asset to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

In Forest of Dean, the planning inspector found that the presumption applied because: the council was unable to show that a five-year housing supply and the adverse impacts, which included less than substantial harm to a listed asset, did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the NPPF as a whole.

In other words, the inspector applied the test in limb 1. The High Court took issue with this approach, saying para 134 was a restrictive policy under limb 2 and required harm to be weighed, in the ordinary way, against the benefits of the proposal. The court reiterated the view in R (Forge Field Society) v Sevenoaks DC [2014] that harm to a listed building must be given considerable importance and weight.


Transform articles

Regulator publishes new code to tackle 'greenwashing'

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has published a new 'Green Claims Code' to ensure businesses are not misleading consumers about their environmental credentials.

22nd September 2021

Read more

The Better Business Act would put responsibility to society and the environment on the same footing as responsibility to shareholders, explains Chris Turner

30th July 2021

Read more

In Elliott-Smith v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the claimant applied for judicial review of the legality of the defendants’ joint decision to create the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS) as a substitute for UK participation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS).

30th July 2021

Read more

Thames Water has been fined £4m after untreated sewage escaped from sewers below London into a park and a river.

30th July 2021

Read more

In R. (on the application of Hudson) v Windsor and Maidenhead RBC, the appellant appealed against a decision to uphold the local authority’s grant of planning permission for the construction of a holiday village at the Legoland Windsor Resort.

28th May 2021

Read more

Are voluntary commitments enough to make the private sector act on waste? David Burrows explores the issues

28th May 2021

Read more

EIA screening should be comprehensive, says Paul Stookes.

6th December 2010

Read more

Civil sanctions make the punishment fit the crime, says Richard Kimblin.

6th September 2010

Read more

The UK's largest water company has been fined twice in seven days for polluting waterways in Berkshire and East Hampshire with sewage.

20th December 2011

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert