Crowborough Training Camp judicial review claim refused permission

In December 2025, Crowborough Shield Community Interest Company lodged a claim for judicial review challenging the process by which the Secretary of State for the Home Department ("SSHD") was preparing to use Crowborough Training Camp, a military barracks in the district of Wealden, to accommodate asylum seekers. SSHD filed an Acknowledgment of Service resisting the claim as premature and, in any event, unarguable.

On 21 January 2026, SSHD took the decision to use the site for the accommodation of asylum seekers, relying on permitted development rights pursuant to Class Q of Part 19 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 ("GPDO"). A few days prior to this decision, on 12 January 2026, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government ("SSHCLG"), named as Second Defendant in the claim, issued a screening direction stating that the proposed development was not "EIA development" for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 ("the EIA Regs").

At a hearing on 25 & 27 February 2026, the Planning Court (Mould J.) refused permission for the claim on the ground that it was premature, and decided that there was no arguable basis for the claim against the SSHCLG.

Crowborough Shield have now filed a new judicial review claim following the permission hearing.

The Claimant is represented by Alex Goodman KC and Charles Bishop, instructed by Russell Cooke.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department was represented at an earlier stage by Paul Brown KC (who was unavailable for the permission hearing), instructed by the Government Legal Department.

The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government was represented at the hearing by Jenny Wigley KC and Matthew Fraser, instructed by the Government Legal Department.

The local planning authority, Wealden District Council, who were named as an Interested Party in the claim, was represented at the hearing by Richard Moules KC.