From today, 1 April 2026, planning applications made to local planning authorities will follow a new route if appeals are decided through written representations
Local authorities now offer a simpler route for planning appeals due to the introduction of regulations originally laid out in February.
Now, written representations will only accept evidence that is put before the local authority during application.
Applicants must now consider more during the initial application
The new measures encourage applicants to ensure they have a full body of evidence at the application stage, which will give local authorities all the information they need to make a decision from the start and speeding up the process of decision-making.
Those making the application will also be able to state which procedure they feel is best, with reasoning, during the appeal process.
Further guidance on the appeals process can be found here.
A new online appeals service was launched last year which aims to provide:
- Faster, more efficient processes – streamlined submission and management of appeals reduces administrative burden
- User-friendly dashboard – designed in line with GOV.UK design principles to make reviewing and monitoring cases easier
- Better communication – improved communication between all parties, with less reliance on paper-based processes
- Continuous improvement – the system is regularly updated based on user feedback and real-world use
The planning system is under close scrutiny
Writing for PBC Today last month, Cathryn Tracey and Sarah Sutherland, partner and practice development lawyer at Burges Salmon LLP, respectively, discussed recent developments in planning permission law.
They discuss the decision made in 2022 in the Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority [2022] UKSC 30 case, and give examples of difficulties that have arisen as a result since, including an appeal decision in Richmond upon Thames, London.
They write: “At present, the routes to amend decision notices in the 1990 Act are s73 which permits amendments to conditions, provided they aren’t inconsistent with the description of development, and s96A which permits non-material amendments. The intention is for s73B to allow for variations to be made to an existing decision notice, subject to the “not substantially different” test. This will allow for variations to be made to both the description of development and conditions, excluding those relating to the timing of implementation. This will offer greater flexibility than s73 and s96A, however, as the term “not substantially different” is not defined, its interpretation will be left to planning judgment and this may lead to further litigation relating to its scope. For proposals which fall outside its reach, the Hillside quandary is likely to remain.
“It is therefore important to carefully consider how incompatibilities can be resolved to enable variations to historic schemes to be consented lawfully.”
The post Planning appeals simplified via new route for written representations appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
