Glenn Kinnersley, R (on the application of) v Maidstone Borough Council
[2023] EWCA Civ 172
Damon Moore v Somerset Council
12 October 2023
[2023] EWHC 2544 (KB)
High Court
A company got permission to build something in Frome. A neighbor sued, saying the permission broke the rules in the town's building plan. The judge agreed with the neighbor because the rules were unclear but best interpreted as requiring more building in a specific part of town. So the building permission was cancelled.
Key Facts
- •Mendip District Council (later replaced by Somerset Council) granted outline planning permission for a mixed-use development on the Acorn site in Frome.
- •Damon Moore, owner of adjacent land (Silk Mill), challenged the decision via judicial review.
- •The core issue is the interpretation of Core Policy 6 (CP6) of the local plan regarding the allocation of 'town centre uses' floorspace.
- •CP6 aims to deliver at least half of the 11,850 sqm 'flexible office/studio space' requirement within Saxonvale.
- •The granted permission included 4,181 sqm of non-residential floorspace, less than 50% of the target.
- •Saxonvale occupies at least 80% of the Frome town centre development area.
Legal Principles
Explanatory text in a local plan can support interpretation of policy, even if it doesn't constitute policy itself.
R (oao Cherkley Campaign Ltd) v Mole Valley DC [2014] EWCA Civ 567
A less rigorous approach to interpreting planning policy is appropriate compared to statutory interpretation.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF) 2012 promotes competitive town centres and requires a sequential approach for allocating town centre uses, prioritizing town centre locations.
NPPF 2012, para 23 & 24
Outcomes
The claim for judicial review succeeded.
The court interpreted CP6's fifth indent as requiring at least 50% of the flexible office/studio space to be within Saxonvale, not the town centre as a whole. The poorly drafted policy, combined with the size and importance of Saxonvale within the town centre, supported this interpretation. The court also considered the purpose of CP6 within the broader context of the local plan and national policy.
The planning permission granted on 30 August 2022 was quashed.
The planning permission was inconsistent with the court's interpretation of CP6.
Similar Cases
Norton St. Philip Parish Council v Mendip District Council
[2022] EWHC 3432 (Admin)
Lochailort Investments Limited v Somerset Council
[2023] EWHC 1776 (Admin)
Marks and Spencer PLC v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors
[2024] EWHC 452 (Admin)
Hayle Town Council, R (on the application of) v The Cornwall Council
[2023] EWHC 389 (Admin)