Daniel Henderson is joined by pupil barrister in the No5 Planning and Environmental Group, Chatura Saravanan, to discuss a number of recent appeal decisions concerning residential schemes, and to identify key takeaways.

 Also, we have includes the links to some of the appeals discussed.

Character and appearance and PDL 

Land at 1-5 Hillside, Portsmouth Road - APP/K3605/W/24/3350737

Link to appeal decision: https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3350737

VSC without Grey Belt 

124 and 142 Church Lane Selston - APP/W3005/W/24/3347049

Link to appeal decision: 

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3347049

Costs 

Land at junction of Newark Road, Nottinghamshire – APP/W3005/W/24/3350529

Link to appeal decisions: 

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3350529

Land North of Mucklestone, Staffordshire – APP/P3420/W/24/3350245

Link to appeal decision: 

https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?caseid=3350245

In light of recent legislative changes and policy announcements, we are at something of a hinge-point as to a vital question in planning practice – what is national policy, how is it organised, and what is its effect? In this episode, Daniel Henderson and James Corbet Burcher discuss the recent Court of Appeal judgment in Mead Realisations v SSHCLG [2025] EWCA Civ 32, put it into some context, and seek to explore what its effect might be in future months, following LURA and recent policy changes.

In the second of a two-part series, Daniel Henderson, James Corbet Burcher, and Sioned Davies discuss the basics of ‘how to do a hearing’, this time from the perspective of a Local Planning Authority.

Given the policy framework in which we now find ourselves in 2025, it is inevitable that practitioners are going to see a significant uptick in appeal work in the coming months. Many of those appeals are going to be listed by PINS as hearings. For newcomers as well as those who are familiar with the format, hearings can be mysterious and procedurally difficult. To that end, in this episode, Daniel Henderson, James Corbet Burcher, and Sioned Davies present a basic discussion on ‘how to do hearings’, as part of a two-part series. In this episode, they look at the question from the perspective of the Appellants.

After months of anticipation, the new NPPF is finally here, heralding what the Deputy Prime Minister has called a “landmark overhaul” to “shake-up a broken planning system”. 
In this episode, Daniel Henderson is joined by Peter Goatley KC, Christian Hawley, and Sioned Davies to pick over some of the most important reforms, and assess their potential impact for developers and local authorities alike.

Felling trees is frequently an essential element of promoting a site, but the law around felling is complex, and changing fast. Proceeding with felling without understanding these complexities, whether in the early stages of preparing a site or in order to make way for the development itself, can result in serious enforcement consequences that have the potential to scupper a proposal altogether. In this episode, Scott Stemp, Daniel Henderson, and Jessica Allen discuss the law around felling licences, the complex network of exceptions, and some important recent caselaw on the interaction with planning permission, including a highly significant High Court judgment from earlier this year.

Effective enforcement is key to ensuring a functional planning system, but the legal provisions can be complex. Recent statutory changes have modified long-standing rules around enforcement time limits and other key enforcement functions while, in May 2024, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the case of Caldwell, providing guidance on the application of the Murfitt principle. Anna Stein and Daniel Henderson discuss the various changes, and consider the impact that they will have on the field of planning enforcement.

Finch is a Supreme Court judgment which has been long awaited. It deals with the effects of development which are ’downstream’. Many practitioners want to know how their schemes might, or might not, be affected by the need to assess green house gas emissions which arise within ’Scope 3’. With Odette Chalaby and Sioned Davies, The Planning Podcast scopes out some of impacts of the judgment.

In the third of a trio of ‘how did we get here?’ podcasts, Daniel Henderson, planning and environmental barrister at No 5 Chambers, maps out the costs regime for High Court challenges to planning and environmental decisions. It has a history, and if you don’t get where is came from you will not fully understand your position in a case where costs protection is in place. There is a note here.