Introduction

The case of Lochailort Investments Ltd v. Mendip District Council ([2020] EWCA Civ 1259) addresses significant issues surrounding the legality of local planning policies, particularly the management of Local Green Spaces (LGSs) within the framework of national Green Belt policies as stipulated in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This commentary delves into the Court of Appeal's decision, exploring its implications for future planning policies and developments.

The parties involved are Lochailort Investments Ltd, a property developer, and Mendip District Council, the local planning authority. The core issue revolves around the legality of Policy 5 in Mendip's Neighbourhood Plan, which pertains to the management and development of designated LGSs.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court of Appeal primarily examined whether Policy 5 of the Norton St Philip Neighbourhood Plan, which governs the development of ten parcels designated as Local Green Spaces, aligns with national Green Belt policies outlined in the NPPF. The appellant, Lochailort Investments Ltd, challenged the legality of Policy 5, arguing that it was more restrictive than the national policies, thereby rendering it unlawful.

The Court found in favor of Lochailort Investments Ltd, determining that Policy 5 was indeed inconsistent with the NPPF's Green Belt policies. Specifically, the policy's requirement that any development on LGSs must "enhance the original use and reasons for the designation of the space" was more restrictive than the NPPF allows, which typically permits certain types of development under "very special circumstances." Consequently, Policy 5 was deemed unlawful due to its lack of reasoned justification for departing from national policy.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references several key cases that set precedents for interpreting planning policies:

• R (Maynard) v Chiltern DC [2015]: Clarified the distinct roles of examiners and inspectors in evaluating neighbourhood plans.
• Carpets of Worth Ltd v Wyre Forest DC (1991) and R (Khatun) v Newham LBC [2004]: Emphasized that national policies must be observed unless there are clear reasons for departure.
• Hopkins Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017]: Highlighted the deference courts give to planning inspectors and examiners.
• R (DLA Delivery Ltd) v Lewes DC [2017]: Elaborated on the requirement for neighbourhood plans to be in "general conformity" with strategic policies.
• Tesco Stores Ltd v Dundee CC [2012] and Keep Bourne End Green v Buckinghamshire Council [2020]: Distinguished between questions of law and planning judgment, restricting courts from overstepping into planning discretion.

These precedents collectively underscore the balance courts maintain between upholding national policies and respecting the expertise of local planning authorities and their examiners.

Legal Reasoning

The Court's legal reasoning hinged on the interpretation of Policy 5 against the backdrop of national Green Belt policies. The NPPF mandates consistency between LGS management and Green Belt policies, which aim to prevent urban sprawl and maintain the openness and permanence of designated areas.

Policy 5 required any development on LGSs to enhance their original use and reasons for designation. The Court found this to be overly restrictive compared to the NPPF, which allows for certain developments under specific conditions without necessitating enhancement. The lack of reasoned justification for Policy 5's departure from the NPPF standards was a critical factor in declaring it unlawful.

Additionally, the Court scrutinized the examiner's report and found it insufficient in addressing the capability of LGSs to endure beyond the plan period, as mandated by paragraph 99 of the NPPF. The reliance on the examiner's generalized statements without substantive analysis further weakened the legality of Policy 5.

Impact

This judgment has far-reaching implications for local planning authorities and developers:

• Consistency with National Policies: Reinforces the necessity for local planning policies to align with national frameworks, ensuring uniformity and preventing overly restrictive local ordinances.
• Scrutiny of Local Policies: Elevates the level of scrutiny applied to local policies, especially when they deviate from established national guidelines.
• Planning Flexibility: Clarifies that while local authorities have discretion, such discretion must be exercised within the bounds of national policy, and departures require robust justification.
• Future Neighbourhood Plans: Influences the drafting and approval of future neighbourhood plans, emphasizing the need for clear, justified policies that align with overarching national objectives.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Local Green Spaces (LGSs)

LGSs are designated areas within local and neighbourhood plans intended to protect green areas of particular importance to communities. They are meant to complement national Green Belt policies by allowing for the preservation and sustainable development of these spaces.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The NPPF is a key document that sets out the government's planning policies for England, providing guidance on how to ensure development is sustainable and aligns with national priorities. It serves as a benchmark against which local plans are measured.

Green Belt Policies

Green Belt policies aim to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open and maintaining its openness and permanence. Development in Green Belts is heavily restricted and only permitted under "very special circumstances."

Very Special Circumstances

This term refers to exceptional conditions under which development that would typically be considered inappropriate in Green Belts may be allowed. It requires a compelling justification that outweighs the potential harm to the Green Belt.

Reasoned Departure

When a local plan diverges from national policies, it must provide clear and logical reasons for doing so. Without such justification, any departure can render the local policy unlawful.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal's decision in Lochailort Investments Ltd v. Mendip District Council underscores the paramount importance of ensuring local planning policies are consistent with national frameworks. By declaring Policy 5 unlawful due to its inconsistency with Green Belt policies, the Court has reinforced the necessity for local authorities to craft policies that not only reflect community needs but also adhere to established national standards.

This judgment serves as a crucial reminder to local planning authorities about the boundaries of their policy-making powers and the imperative to provide reasoned justifications when deviating from national policies. For developers and community members alike, it clarifies the legal landscape surrounding the designation and management of Local Green Spaces, ensuring that future developments balance local interests with broader sustainability and planning objectives.