Introduction

Parties Involved:
The petitioner in this case is Tesco Stores Limited, challenging the decision of the respondent, Perth and Kinross Council.

Case Background:
This case examines the council's approval of a planning application submitted by Aldi Stores Limited for the construction of a new retail unit in Perth. Tesco seeks to have the council's decision reduced, arguing that the council misapplied relevant planning policies, specifically Policy 28 of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4).

Key Issues:
The central issue is whether the council correctly interpreted and applied Policy 28 of NPF4 in approving Aldi's development, which Tesco contends does not qualify as a "small scale neighbourhood retail development."

Summary of the Judgment

The Scottish Court of Session, presided by Lord Richardson, evaluated Tesco's challenge against Perth and Kinross Council's decision to approve Aldi's planning application. The court scrutinized the interpretation of Policy 28 of NPF4, determining that the council erred in classifying Aldi's proposed 1,800 square metre development as a "small scale neighbourhood retail development." The judgment concluded that the scale and impact of the proposed development exceeded the parameters set by Policy 28(c), leading to the reduction of the council's decision in favor of Tesco.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment heavily referenced Tesco Stores v Dundee City Council [2012] SC (UKSC) 278, where Lord Reed emphasized the necessity of objective interpretation of planning policies based on their explicit language and context. Additionally, the court considered Corbett v Cornwall Council [2022] EWCA Civ 1069 and Bloor Homes East Midlands Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] PTSR 1283, which outline principles for interpreting policy statements and the limits of administrative discretion. These precedents underscored the judiciary's approach to ensuring that planning policies are applied consistently and without overextension.

Legal Reasoning

The court delved into the language of Policy 28 of NPF4, particularly focusing on paragraph (c) which pertains to "new small scale neighbourhood retail development." The judgment clarified that such developments are intended to serve localized communities with limited scale and impact. Aldi's proposed development, characterized by its substantial size and extensive catchment area, did not align with the criteria set forth in Policy 28(c). Furthermore, the court critiqued the council's supplementary report, noting that the attempt to qualify the development as a small scale project based on net floor area increase was unfounded and inconsistent with the policy's intent.

Impact

This judgment sets a significant precedent for interpreting Policy 28 of NPF4, particularly in distinguishing between relocations and genuinely small scale developments in out-of-centre locations. Future cases involving retail development applications will reference this decision to assess compliance with Policy 28, ensuring that local authorities adhere strictly to policy language and intended meanings. The ruling also emphasizes the need for councils to provide clear and comprehensive reasoning when applying planning policies, reinforcing judicial oversight in planning decisions.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Policy Interpretation

Objective Interpretation: Planning policies must be interpreted based on their literal wording and context, without inferring meanings beyond what is explicitly stated.

Small Scale Neighbourhood Retail Development

This term refers to retail projects that are limited in size and designed to serve the immediate local community, ensuring minimal impact on the broader retail landscape.

Sequential Approach

A methodical process where development proposals are evaluated based on a hierarchy of preferred locations, typically prioritizing town centers before considering out-of-centre sites.

Conclusion

The judgment in Tesco Stores Ltd v Perth and Kinross Council underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the precise language and intent of planning policies. By ruling that Aldi's large-scale development does not qualify as a "small scale neighbourhood retail development," the court has established a clear standard for future interpretations of Policy 28 of NPF4. This decision not only reinforces the importance of strict policy adherence but also ensures that retail developments contribute positively and sustainably to their intended communities. Consequently, local authorities are reminded of the necessity to provide thorough and accurate justifications in their planning decisions, aligning with both policy directives and community interests.