• insights-banner

    In the Press

Planning, Housing Today and ENDS Report quote Claire Fallows on the Supreme Court's long awaited nutrient neutrality ruling

min read

The Supreme Court has upheld an appeal brought by a developer, ruling that new environmental policy cannot retrospectively undermine planning permission already granted.

 

The case concerned a residential development put forward by CG Fry & Son, for which Somerset West and Taunton Council granted reserved matters approval subject to conditions in June 2020.

 

When the developer sought to discharge the imposed conditions in 2021, the council withheld approval based on government guidance given two months after planning permission had been granted. The case came to the Supreme Court following successive appeals from the developer against the council’s decision to delay approval of the third, 190-home phase of the 650-home Jurston Farm scheme  in Wellington, Somerset. The appeals were dismissed by a local authority planning inspector, the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

 

The appeal was based on two grounds. The first concerning the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the Habitats Regulations) was dismissed by the court. 

Ground one questioned whether regulation 63 of the Habitats Regulations requires an “appropriate assessment” to be undertaken before a local planning authority decides to discharge conditions requiring the approval of reserved matters in a grant of outline planning permission. The second claiming that changes of scientific advice should not impact a grant of outline planning permission was accepted.

 

Claire Fallows, Partner and Head of Planning, comments on the ruling for Planning, Housing Today and ENDS Report. She explains: 

 

The appeal was ultimately allowed on the basis that the relevant protected site was not directly subject to the Habitat Regulations (only national policy required it to be given the same protection).

"Matters relating to habitat protection could not be taken into account in discharging conditions unrelated to such matters. This is a helpful reminder for authorities and developers that where an outline permission is granted, it is not open to a planning authority to revisit matters already approved in principle at the outline stage.

Read the full article in Housing Today, as well as Planning and ENDS Report (subscriptions required)

Our thinking

  • IBA Annual Conference 2026

    Jean-Baptiste Beauvoir-Planson

    Events

  • Surveyors' Refresher Seminar

    Hope Barton

    Events

    min read
  • Right to Work Reforms Webinar

    Kelvin Tanner

    Events

    min read
  • Francis Ho writes in Building magazine about the process of remediation for residential buildings with unsafe cladding

    Francis Ho

    In the Press

    min read
  • Hannah Owen and Lydia Kember write in Family Law Journal on the intersection of trust law and surrogacy

    Hannah Owen

    In the Press

    min read
  • Shaanil Senarath-Dassanayake and Mike Barrington write in Finextra about regulatory themes every FCA-authorised fintech leader should be watching

    Shaanil Senarath-Dassanayake

    In the Press

    min read
  • Building Safety Update Seminar

    David Savage

    Events

    min read
  • Darren Bailey writes in City AM about what European football could learn from the US sports law landscape

    Darren Bailey

    In the Press

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys recognised in Spear’s Legal Indices 2026

    News

    min read
  • Simon Ridpath features in the latest episode of the Non-Billable podcast

    Simon Ridpath

    In the Press

    min read
  • Private equity (PE): How Founders and Management Teams can protect themselves - it’s a marriage of convenience so make sure your pre-nup is watertight…

    Nadim Meer

    Insights

    min read
  • From Pilot to Nationwide Protection: New Powers to Protect Victims of Domestic Abuse

    Hilde Braaten Resseth

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Lauren Fraser comments in New Law Journal on a Supreme Court decision regarding Right to Manage claims

    Lauren Fraser

    In the Press

    min read
  • What could the Law Commission’s proposals on the rights of first refusal mean for office occupiers?

    David Haines

    Insights

    min read
  • Birthright citizenship changes and US surrogacy: what UK and Swiss intended parents need to know

    Michael Wells-Greco

    Insights

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises long-standing client BioMed Realty on Jagex's move to Granta Park

    Amy Shuttleworth

    News

    min read
  • Property Patter: Service Charges – What is the current state of play?

    Georgina Muskett

    Podcasts

  • World Trademark Review quotes Robert Lundie Smith on the High Court’s $11.6 million damages award to Swatch

    Robert Lundie Smith

    In the Press

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys appoints Justine Howard as General Counsel

    Justine Howard

    News

    min read
  • Niamh Tenison contributes to an Estates Gazette legal Q&A on limitation periods and incorrect court fees

    Niamh Tenison

    In the Press

    min read
Back to top