Inquiry appeals: proofs, statements and the timetable
An inquiry is the only appeal procedure where evidence is tested by cross-examination, and that single feature drives the documents, the deadlines and the cost.
An inquiry is the only appeal procedure where evidence is tested by cross-examination, and that single feature drives everything else about it: the documents, the deadlines and the cost. Since the procedural reforms that followed the 2019 review of inquiries, the Planning Inspectorate works to a compressed programme with a bespoke timetable issued in the start letter, and the deadlines in that letter are the ones that bind you.
Read the start letter the day it arrives. The statutory Rules set the framework, but the timetable in the letter is what the inspector will hold the parties to.
From start letter to inquiry
The sequence is the same on every inquiry, and the periods between the steps are what vary.
- The appeal is validated and the Inspectorate issues a start letter, setting the starting date and the timetable for every subsequent document.
- The local planning authority returns the appeal questionnaire with the case file and its committee report.
- Statements of case are exchanged, setting out the full particulars of each party's case.
- A case management conference is held where the issues are complex, fixing the main issues, the evidence topics and the running order.
- The statement of common ground is agreed and submitted.
- Proofs of evidence, with summaries where required, are exchanged.
- Notice of the date, time and place is given, and the inquiry sits.
- The inspector carries out the site visit, usually accompanied.
- The decision is issued in writing, or a report goes to the Secretary of State on a recovered appeal.
The questionnaire stage is easy to overlook and it sets the documentary foundation for everything that follows, as set out in the notes on the appeal questionnaire and the council's statement. Where the Secretary of State has recovered the appeal, the final stage differs and the position is covered under recovered appeals and called-in applications.
Statements of case and what they fix
A statement of case sets out the full particulars of the case a party proposes to put forward, and lists the documents that party intends to refer to or put in evidence.
Its function is to prevent ambush. A point not raised in the statement of case can still be run, but the inspector will ask why it appeared late, and an opposing party can seek time or costs if it has been prejudiced. So the statement should be complete on the issues even where the detailed evidence follows later.
Three practical points. Frame the issues in the same terms as the reasons for refusal, so the inspector can map one to the other. Identify the policies relied on by number and by plan, and state the plan's adoption date. And list the appeal decisions you intend to rely on with their reference numbers, since they are indicative of how inspectors have approached an issue rather than binding, and the other side will want to read them.
Interested parties also have a route in at this stage, with their own deadlines, and their involvement affects an inquiry timetable more than people expect where a local group instructs an advocate.
Proofs of evidence and the summary rule
A proof of evidence is the witness's own evidence in chief, written out. It is exchanged in advance, normally four weeks before the inquiry unless the start letter sets a different date, and the witness confirms it at the inquiry before being cross-examined on it.
The Rules require that where a proof runs to more than 1,500 words, a written summary is provided with it. The summary is what the witness reads at the inquiry, so it has to stand alone, carry the argument and avoid introducing anything the full proof does not contain.
Some working rules for proofs.
| Element | What works |
|---|---|
| Length | As short as the issue allows; inspectors do not reward volume |
| Structure | One section per main issue, in the order the inquiry will take them |
| Appendices | Numbered, paginated and cross-referenced from the text, never a bundle of unexplained documents |
| Opinion | Reasoned and attributable to the witness's own expertise |
| Tone | Measured; advocacy belongs to the advocate, not the witness |
| Summary | Free-standing, proportionate, no new material |
Witnesses give evidence in their own professional capacity. A proof drafted by the advocate and signed by the witness is transparent to an experienced inspector and damages the witness under cross-examination.
The statement of common ground and what it is worth
The appellant and the local planning authority prepare an agreed statement of common ground and submit it in advance, usually four weeks before the inquiry.
It is the most underused document in the whole process. Every matter agreed in it is a matter nobody has to spend inquiry time on, which shortens the sitting and reduces cost for both sides. The agreed facts also become the platform for the disputed ones, so a well-drafted statement narrows the argument to what actually divides the parties.
Agree the things that are plainly uncontroversial: the site description, the planning history, the development plan policies and their adoption dates, the application documents and drawing numbers, the consultee responses, the technical inputs that are not in dispute, and the agreed list of main issues. Then record the disagreements plainly rather than pretending they do not exist.
The structure that works, and what belongs under each heading, is set out in statement of common ground: structure for an inquiry, and the wider role these documents play is covered in statements of common ground at hearings and inquiries.
Start drafting it early. A statement prepared in the week before the deadline agrees far less than one begun at the case management stage.
Conditions and obligations before you get there
Two documents have to be ready before the inquiry sits, and both are routinely late.
An agreed list of draft conditions, prepared jointly, with any disputed condition identified and the competing wordings set out. Inspectors deal with conditions in a roundtable session, and arriving without an agreed list wastes a session and irritates everyone.
A completed planning obligation, or a draft in agreed form with a clear completion date. A unilateral undertaking is the fallback where the council will not execute an agreement, but it has to be properly drafted and the obligations must meet the statutory tests. An obligation delivered after the inquiry closes can still be accepted, but it is a risk you do not need.
Test each obligation against the tests for planning obligations before you offer it. An offered obligation that fails those tests cannot be taken into account and can look like an attempt to buy a permission.
Roundtables and cross examination
Cross-examination is what distinguishes an inquiry, and it is applied selectively. The inspector will usually direct that some topics are dealt with by roundtable discussion instead, typically conditions, obligations, and technical matters where the disagreement is narrow.
Prepare witnesses for both formats, because they are different skills. Cross-examination rewards precision, willingness to concede a fair point and refusal to argue beyond the witness's expertise. A roundtable rewards the ability to move towards agreement in real time.
The inspector will also manage the running order and may sit into the evening on a longer inquiry. Build the team's availability around the whole sitting rather than around the day your witness is listed, because the order moves.
Costs risk at inquiry
An inquiry is where costs applications are most often made, because the sums at stake are large enough to justify them.
Costs are awarded where a party has behaved unreasonably and that behaviour has caused another party to incur expense that need not have been incurred. Substantive unreasonableness includes a reason for refusal that cannot be substantiated by evidence, or refusal against officer advice with no supporting material. Procedural unreasonableness includes late evidence, failing to review a case before the inquiry, and withdrawing a reason for refusal at the door of the inquiry after the other side has prepared for it.
The exposure runs both ways. An appellant who introduces a materially different scheme, provides evidence late, or pursues a hopeless ground is equally at risk.
Make any application before the inquiry closes and quantify it properly. And keep a contemporaneous note of the behaviour you are complaining about, because an application supported by dates and correspondence is a different proposition from one supported by recollection.
Whatever the procedure, the appeal is only as good as the case that went in with the application, and a clear Planning Statement at application stage does more to shape an inquiry than most of the work done afterwards.
Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which reports a scheme on your site is likely to need.
This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with the Planning Inspectorate 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.
Frequently asked questions
What sets the inquiry timetable?
The start letter issued by the Planning Inspectorate after the appeal is validated. The statutory inquiries procedure rules provide the framework, but the bespoke timetable in the letter fixes the dates for statements of case, the statement of common ground, proofs of evidence and the inquiry itself, and the inspector holds the parties to it.
When is a summary of a proof of evidence required?
Where the proof runs to more than 1,500 words. The summary is what the witness reads at the inquiry, so it must stand alone, carry the argument and introduce nothing the full proof does not contain. Proofs are normally exchanged four weeks before the inquiry unless the start letter says otherwise.
What should a statement of common ground contain?
The site description, planning history, development plan policies with adoption dates, application documents and drawing numbers, consultee responses, technical inputs not in dispute and the agreed list of main issues. Disagreements should be recorded plainly. Every matter agreed is inquiry time nobody has to spend.
What has to be ready before the inquiry sits?
An agreed list of draft conditions with any disputed wording set out side by side, and a completed planning obligation or a draft in agreed form with a completion date. Both are routinely late. An obligation can be accepted after the inquiry closes, but relying on that is an avoidable risk.
When are costs awarded at an inquiry?
Where a party has behaved unreasonably and that behaviour caused another party expense that need not have been incurred. That covers a reason for refusal with no supporting evidence, refusal against officer advice without material, late evidence and withdrawing a reason at the door of the inquiry. Make the application before the inquiry closes.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.