Neighbourhood plan policy or local plan policy in a decision

Where a made neighbourhood plan and an adopted local plan say different things about the same proposal, the later of the two wins. That rule sits in section 38(5) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, and it applies to genuine conflict rather than to two policies that simply cover different ground. It catches people out, because the instinct is that the local plan must outrank the smaller document, and in law it does not.

Both are part of the development plan. Section 38(6) requires applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise, and a made neighbourhood plan carries that same statutory footing.

What makes each part of the development plan

A local plan becomes part of the development plan when the local planning authority adopts it, after an examination by an independent inspector. In London the London Plan sits alongside it. Minerals and waste plans, where they exist separately, do too.

A neighbourhood plan becomes part of the development plan when the authority makes it, which follows a referendum in the neighbourhood area carried at a simple majority of those voting. Before the referendum it is examined against the basic conditions, and one of those conditions is that the plan must be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the development plan for the area.

That conformity test is the reason real conflict is less common than objectors hope. A neighbourhood plan cannot lawfully be made if it cuts across the strategic housing figure. It can be more demanding on design, on local green space, on the treatment of a village edge, and on which sites are allocated.

The rule where policies conflict

Section 38(5) is short. Where the development plan contains policies that conflict, the conflict is resolved in favour of the policy contained in the last document to be adopted, approved or published.

Two things follow. A neighbourhood plan made after the local plan prevails over the conflicting local plan policy, and a local plan adopted after the neighbourhood plan prevails over the conflicting neighbourhood plan policy. Dates matter more than hierarchy.

The harder question is whether a conflict exists at all. A local plan policy permitting infill within a settlement boundary and a neighbourhood plan policy requiring infill to reflect the prevailing building line are not in conflict. They apply together, and the proposal has to satisfy both.

Officers will normally set out both policies in the report and explain why they are compatible. Where the report reaches for section 38(5) without first asking whether the policies can be read together, that is worth raising in representations.

Weight while a plan is still being prepared

An emerging neighbourhood plan is not part of the development plan and cannot be treated as though it were. It is a material consideration, and the weight given to it grows as it advances through consultation, examination and referendum.

The same principle applies to an emerging local plan. The national Framework sets out how weight is attributed to emerging policies, by reference to the stage reached, the extent of unresolved objections and the degree of consistency with national policy. Check the current edition, because the Framework was re-issued on 17 August 2026 with policy-coded chapters and the wording has moved between editions.

In practice a neighbourhood plan that has passed examination and is awaiting referendum carries real weight. One that has been published for consultation but faces substantial unresolved objections carries very little.

Housing supply and protection provisions

National policy has, in recent editions, given a made neighbourhood plan some protection against speculative housing applications where the plan is recent and contains policies and allocations to meet its identified housing requirement. The precise conditions and the age limit have changed between Framework editions, so read the version in force at the date of your decision rather than a summary written for an earlier one.

This is the point where objectors and applicants most often argue past each other. The applicant will say the authority cannot demonstrate its housing land supply and the presumption applies. The parish will say the neighbourhood plan is protected. Both positions depend on conditions that have to be checked against the current text, not asserted. Where the argument turns on a numerical standard rather than a policy principle, the same discipline applies: see nationally described space standard or local minimum sizes for how a national figure and a local policy sit together.

Site allocations in neighbourhood plans

A neighbourhood plan can allocate sites for development, and this is where the two documents most often appear to clash. A plan may allocate land the local plan left as open countryside, or may decline to allocate a site the local plan identified.

An allocation in the later document prevails over a conflicting allocation in the earlier one. What an allocation does not do is grant permission. The proposal still has to satisfy the development management policies in both plans, the design expectations, and any constraints on the site.

Where a neighbourhood plan designates Local Green Space, the effect is a strong restriction on development, managed consistently with policy for Green Belt land. That designation has to be justified at examination, and it survives a later local plan unless the later plan removes it. Local green space or green belt designation explains where the two differ.

Reading both together in a statement

If you are writing representations or a supporting statement, set the two documents out in a table rather than in prose, with the adoption or making date against each policy. It takes ten minutes and it settles most of the argument before anyone reaches section 38(5).

Then state, for each policy pair, whether they are compatible or in conflict, and only where they conflict apply the later-document rule. A Planning Statement that does this in its policy section is markedly harder to argue with than one that lists policies without dating them.

What objectors can rely on

A made neighbourhood plan is a statutory document, not a wish list, and an officer report that ignores it is vulnerable. If the plan contains a criteria-based policy on building heights, materials or frontage treatment, an objection framed against that policy is a material planning consideration and has to be addressed.

An objection that the proposal is unpopular is not. Nor is an objection based on a draft policy in a plan that has not yet reached examination, although raising it and asking the officer to state the weight given is reasonable.

Parish and town councils are statutory consultees on applications in their area and can ask to be notified. Where the neighbourhood plan was theirs, they are usually the best-placed party to explain what a policy was intended to do, and an examiner's report on the plan is a public document that shows how the policy was tested. Start with the parish or town council's website to find out whether a made plan covers your address, then read the examiner's report before you write a word.

If you are drafting the policy section of an application, the full set of PlanScope report types shows which supporting documents usually sit alongside it.

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