Called-in applications under section 77

A called in planning application is one the Secretary of State has directed the local planning authority to refer for determination centrally, under section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The council keeps the file, carries on consulting and writes its report, but it loses the power to decide. For a promoter of a large scheme that shift matters: the timetable lengthens, the forum becomes an inquiry and the decision is taken against national policy as much as the local plan.

Call-in is rare. The published policy is to be very selective and to intervene only where planning issues of more than local importance are at stake, so most large applications, including contentious ones, are decided by the council as normal.

What a call-in does to an application

A direction under section 77 transfers the decision, not the application. The applicant does not reapply and does not pay a second fee. Validation, publicity, consultation and the officer's assessment all continue under the council's procedures.

What changes is who determines it and how. The Secretary of State decides, almost always after a local inquiry held by an inspector who then reports with a recommendation. Section 77 guarantees the applicant and the council the opportunity of a hearing before an inspector, so a called-in application is not decided on the papers unless both sides agree.

There is no right of appeal against the resulting decision. The only route of challenge is a statutory review in the High Court under section 288 of the 1990 Act, on legal grounds rather than planning merits.

Who can request one

Anyone can write in asking for a call-in. In practice the requests that get traction come from a narrow set of sources: a statutory consultee that has objected and maintained its objection, a neighbouring authority affected across a boundary, a national amenity body, a Member of Parliament writing on behalf of constituents, or a local authority that is minded to approve against officer advice or against national policy.

A request should do more than record opposition. It needs to identify which of the published criteria is engaged and why the issue reaches beyond the locality. A letter that simply restates objections already before the council is unlikely to achieve anything.

Timing is everything. A request made after the council has issued its decision notice is too late, because there is nothing left to call in.

The published call-in criteria

The policy has been stated in Parliament and repeated in guidance since. The categories are applications that may conflict with national policy on important matters, that could have significant effects beyond their immediate locality, that give rise to substantial regional or national controversy, that raise important architectural or urban design issues, or that may involve the interests of national security or of foreign governments.

Two points are easy to miss. The criteria are a description of the sort of case that may justify intervention, not a set of entitlements, so meeting one does not produce a call-in. And the overriding statement of policy is selectivity, which is why refusals to intervene vastly outnumber directions.

Holding directions and their effect

Before deciding whether to call an application in, the Secretary of State can issue a direction restricting the grant of permission. The power sits in article 31 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, and it is usually described as a holding direction.

The effect is narrow and absolute. While the direction is in force the council must not grant permission. It may still refuse, and it may still resolve to approve subject to the direction being lifted. Officers sometimes take a resolution to committee anyway so that the position is on the record.

Holding directions are often short, measured in weeks, but they can run longer where the department is gathering information. For a developer with a land option running down or a funding condition tied to a consent date, that uncertainty is the real cost rather than the inquiry itself.

Procedure once called in

Expect something close to an appeal by inquiry. The Inspectorate sets a timetable, the parties produce statements of case, proofs of evidence and a statement of common ground, and the inquiry runs with advocates, witnesses and cross-examination. Rule 6 status allows a third party to participate as a main party where they can show sufficient interest.

The sequence is usually as follows.

1. The direction is issued and the council stops short of decision.
2. The Inspectorate makes contact and fixes a pre-inquiry timetable.
3. Statements of case are exchanged, followed by proofs of evidence.
4. The inquiry sits, with site visits before or during it.
5. The inspector reports to the Secretary of State with a recommendation.
6. The decision letter issues, with the inspector's report appended.

Where the development is EIA development, the Environmental Statement and any further information requested remain the evidential spine of the case, and the careful handling of environmental information under the EIA Regulations becomes more exposed because it will be tested in cross-examination.

Timescales and cost consequences

A call-in adds time, and the honest answer on how much is that it varies widely with the size of the inquiry and the department's workload. Budget on the basis that the inquiry stage alone behaves like a major appeal, with counsel, expert witnesses, a programme officer's costs and venue costs, and that the decision follows some months after the inquiry closes.

Costs awards are possible but exceptional, and they turn on unreasonable behaviour rather than on who wins. Nobody should plan a call-in strategy on the expectation of recovering fees.

The indirect costs usually bite harder: extended professional retainers, repeated updates to the evidence base as policy moves underneath the scheme, and survey work that has to be redone because seasonal windows have passed.

Preparing for the possibility

If a scheme sits near one of the criteria, assume a call-in request will be made and build the file accordingly. Keep the policy analysis national as well as local. Keep the consultee correspondence tidy. Keep the technical evidence in a state where it can be served as a proof of evidence rather than reassembled from fragments.

Where the application is in outline, be clear in the submission about what is settled and what is left for later, because the scope of the reserved matters shapes what an inspector can usefully examine.

A well-structured Planning Statement that sets out the national policy case alongside the local plan case is the document most often rewritten under pressure once a direction lands. Drafting it that way at submission stage costs nothing extra.

Browse all 66 PlanScope report types to see what a major application's evidence base usually contains.

This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.

PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.