Local Government Reorganisation 2026
Read our exclusive guide providing insight into the challenges that senior legal professionals are facing, alongside a step-by-step look at the work they will need to complete to ensure a smooth transition.
March 16, 2026
Local Government Reorganisation 2026
Judge rejects attack on grant of planning permission for incinerator in south London
- Details
A High Court judge has rejected a judicial review challenge to a London council’s grant of planning permission for a controversial energy-from-waste incinerator.
The claimant in Khan, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough Of Sutton [2014] EWHC 3663 challenged Sutton’s grant of permission for an incinerator at Beddington Fields. The site is Metropolitan Open Land.
He advanced five grounds of challenge, but was only given permission on four. They were:
- There had been an error in the interpretation of the South London Waste Plan, which had been produced jointly by Croydon, Kingston, Merton and Sutton;
- The defendant council erred in its consideration of the "very special circumstances" required by the National Planning Policy Framework for the grant of planning permission on Metropolitan Open Land;
- The council fettered its discretion in the decision-making exercise; and
- Sutton erred in its assessment of the environmental impact of the combined heat and power (CHP) pipework beyond the boundaries of the site.
Mrs Justice Patterson rejected the claim on all four grounds.
In a summary of the ruling, Francis Taylor Building – whose Saira Kabir Sheikh QC appeared for Sutton – noted the judge’s conclusions that:
- Sutton had not fettered its discretion and that the evidence demonstrated the council had taken care to ensure separation of roles;
- The local authority was entitled to form the judgement that the environmental issues relating to the as yet unknown route of the pipes need not be assessed when permission for the scheme was considered;
- There was nothing in the ground of challenge in relation to “very special circumstances”;
- The council had applied its own policy correctly including in respect of considering the correct baseline.
A copy of the judgment can be viewed here.
Related Articles
Must read
Service charge recovery and the Building Safety Act 2022
Zoe McGovern, Sian Gibbon and Caroline Frampton set out what local authorities need to consider when it comes to the Building Safety Act 2022 and service charge recovery.
Establishing relevant defects under the Building Safety Act
The First Tier Tribunal has provided helpful clarity on what amounts to a “relevant defect” for the purposes of Remediation Orders and Remediation Contribution Orders under the Building Safety Act 2022, writes Sarah Grant.
Weekly mandatory food waste collections
What are the new rules on food waste collections and why are councils set to miss the March deadline? Ashfords’ energy and resource management team explain.
Sponsored articles
Walker Morris supports Tower Hamlets Council in first known Remediation Contribution Order application issued by local authority
Walker Morris has supported Tower Hamlets London Borough Council (LBTH) in issuing what is believed to be one of the first Remediation…
Unlocking legal talent
Jonathan Bourne of Damar Training sets out why in-house council teams and law firms should embrace apprenticeships.
Solicitor - Planning and Highways
£50,269 - £53,460 per annum
Senior Solicitor - Planning & Highways
£48,226 plus market supplement of £10,445
Solicitor/Lawyer - Planning
£44,075 plus market supplement of £8,223
Senior Lawyer - Commercial & General
£42,839 - £46,142 per annum
Lawyer (Contract, Procurement & Licensing)
£48,226 – £51,356 per annum
Locums
Poll








