High Court agrees to hear statutory review raising key issues on nutrient neutrality and planning

The High Court has agreed to hear a developer’s statutory review challenge to the dismissal of its appeal against the refusal of Somerset West and Taunton Council to discharge conditions on the reserved matters approval for phase 3 of a development, it has been reported.

Charles Banner KC of Keating Chambers – who is lead counsel for the claimant, alongside Dr Ashley Bowes of Cornerstone Barristers, instructed by Clarke Willmott – said on LinkedIn that the issues in the case are “of considerable importance in relation to nutrient neutrality and planning”.

Banner said these issues included:

1. Whether appropriate assessment is required under the Habitats Regulations at the discharge of conditions stage.
2. If so, whether the scope of the appropriate assessment required by the Habitats Regulations is limited to the scope of the conditions being discharged or whether it must cover the impact of the entire development despite the principle of development already having been established by the grant of permission.
3. Whether the position is different in relation to Ramsar sites which are not protected by law under the Habitats Regulations directly but which are the subject of policy under NPPF para. 181.

Banner said: “Around 40% of the 100,000+ homes currently held up by the nutrient neutrality issues already have planning permission and are at the RM or discharge of conditions stages, and are thus affected by these issues.”

Richard Moules and Nick Grant of Landmark Chambers are acting for the Secretary of State.

Christopher Boyle KC and Luke Wilcox, also of Landmark Chambers, are acting for the interested party, Somerset West and Taunton Council.

Landmark said the case “concerns the application of the Habitats Regulations ‘nutrient neutrality’ requirement both at condition discharge stage, and as applicable to Ramsar Sites”.

A two day hearing is set to be listed in Bristol shortly.

Adam Carey