Home > Expertise > Planning and Infrastructure > Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Many of Landmark’s barristers have expertise and experience in these areas, with regular appearances in the Planning Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The work covers the whole spectrum of planning judicial and statutory reviews, including judicial review claims, claims for statutory review under sections 287-288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and claims for statutory review under section 113 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.  Regular clients include major developers, local planning authorities and the Secretary of State.

Cases involving members of chambers are too numerous to list in full, and the following are merely a few recent examples:

  • Lambeth LBC v Secretary of State [2018] – section 288 challenge to decision granting certificate of lawfulness for unrestricted retail use for the sale of all goods (including food) on 0.74ha site – correct interpretation of planning permission;
  • Baroness Cumberlege v Secretary of State [2018] – section 288 challenge to decision granting planning permission for up to 50 dwellings on site in Sussex – failure by decision-maker to take into account relevant parallel decision;
  • R (Oates) v Wealden DC [2018] – judicial review challenge to planning permission for up to 390 dwellings on site in Sussex – regulation 123 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010;
  • Good Energy Generation Ltd v Secretary of State­ [2018] – section 288 challenge to decision refusing planning permission for wind farm in Cornwall – relevance of Community Investment Scheme and Local Tariff within developer’s section 106 unilateral undertaking;
  • Parkhurst Road Ltd v Secretary of State [2018] – section 288 challenge to decision refusing planning permission for residential scheme – Benchmark Land Value and viability of affordable housing;
  • Braintree DC v Secretary of State [2018] – section 288 challenge to decision granting planning permission for residential development – meaning of “isolated” in paragraph 55 of National Planning Policy Framework;
  • R (Brown) v Ealing LBC [2018] – judicial review challenge to planning permission for new training academy for professional football club – Metropolitan Open Land – critique of officer report to committee;
  • R (SAVE Britain’s Heritage) v Westminster CC [2018] – judicial review challenge to planning permission for “Paddington Cube” – 50,000m² mixed use commercial building, piazza, access road, London Underground station entrance etc;
  • R (Mawbey) v Lewisham LBC [2018] – judicial review challenge to decision that installation of rooftop mobile telephone apparatus was permitted development – meaning of “mast”.
icon-accordion-chevron icon-arrow-left icon-arrow-right icon-chevron-down icon-chevron-left icon-cross icon-download icon-letter icon-linked-in icon-phone-outline icon-phone icon-search icon-search icon-select-chevron icon-top-right-corner icon-twitter