Reasons for refusal that will not survive an appeal

Reasons for refusal drafting is a statutory duty, not a formality. Article 35 of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015 requires a notice refusing permission to state clearly and precisely the full reasons, specifying all policies and proposals in the development plan that are relevant to the decision. A reason that recites a policy number and asserts conflict without explaining why does not meet that standard, and at appeal it hands the appellant the running.

A defective reason does not make the refusal invalid. The remedy is the appeal. But the quality of the reasons shapes the appeal, and in a hearing or inquiry it can shape a costs award.

What the decision notice must state

Three elements are required by article 35. The full reasons for refusal, stated clearly and precisely. The policies and proposals in the development plan relevant to the decision. And, where conditions are imposed on a grant, a reason for each one.

Read together with the duty under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 to determine in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise, that means the notice should show the plan policy, the conflict, and the material considerations weighed against it.

Most notices get the first element and skip the second. A reason reading "the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on the character of the area contrary to policy DM3" names a policy but does not say which part of the character, judged against what, by reference to which evidence.

Reasons that fail to engage with the evidence

The Planning Practice Guidance on appeals lists behaviours that can attract an award of costs against a local planning authority. Two of them are directly about reasons. Failing to produce evidence to substantiate each reason for refusal. And making vague, generalised or inaccurate assertions about a proposal's impact, unsupported by objective analysis.

That second phrase is worth learning by heart, because it describes a large share of refusal notices. Four patterns recur.

• Assertion of harm with no measurement, where the harm is measurable. Overlooking without separation distances. Overshadowing without a daylight study. Highway danger without accident data or visibility figures.
• Reliance on a consultee objection the council did not read. A one-line highways response saying "insufficient information" becomes a reason for refusal, and at appeal the highway authority declines to defend it.
• Harm asserted in the face of the council's own evidence base. A refusal on townscape grounds where the conservation area appraisal describes the site as a negative contributor.
• A reason that has been superseded. The scheme was amended, the objection was resolved, and the reason survived into the notice because nobody revisited it.

Where a refusal rests on the fourth pattern, raise it before appealing. The guidance treats failure to review a case promptly following a change in circumstances as potentially unreasonable, and a letter asking the council to confirm whether the reason is maintained creates a useful record.

Policy cited without analysis

A policy reference is not an analysis. Where a reason cites a development plan policy, the appellant's statement of case should quote the policy in full and work through each limb, because policies written as a list of criteria are frequently cited where only one criterion is in issue, or none.

Two tactical points follow. First, check whether the cited policy is out of date or has been superseded by a later plan or by national policy, which changes the weight. Second, check whether the policy actually says what the reason implies. Design policies in particular are often expressed as encouragement rather than prohibition, and a reason that treats a "should normally" as a bar is vulnerable.

Where the council has cited the National Planning Policy Framework, state the edition. The Framework was reorganised on 17 August 2026 into policy-coded chapters, having been renumbered in December 2024, so a reason quoting an older paragraph number may be citing text that no longer exists in that form. Checking how earlier appeal decisions handled the same policy is quicker than arguing from first principles.

Effect on the appellant's statement of case

Thin reasons are an advantage, but they change how the statement of case should be written. Do not simply rebut what the notice says and stop.

Under section 79 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the inspector deals with the application as if it had been made in the first instance, so they can identify main issues the council never raised. An appellant who only answers the stated reasons can find the decision turning on something else entirely.

The structure that works is to answer each reason squarely, then deal with the obvious main issues the notice does not mention, briefly and with evidence. A Planning Statement that already covers the full policy test, prepared at application stage, is most of the appeal statement and is the reason it is worth writing properly the first time.

Watch the deadlines. A section 78 appeal against refusal of a householder application must be submitted within 12 weeks of the decision, and other appeals generally within six months, so confirm the current period against the Planning Inspectorate's guidance before relying on either figure.

Costs applications based on the reasons

Costs are not awarded because the council lost. The test is unreasonable behaviour that has caused the other party to incur wasted expense.

Applications are most commonly made and granted in hearing and inquiry appeals, where the parties have incurred real cost on advocacy and evidence. The position in written representations appeals is narrower, so check the current appeals guidance for what is available on your procedure.

A costs application built on inadequate reasons needs three things. A clear statement of what evidence was absent, a record of the appellant asking for it, and the council's response or silence. Where a council declines to produce any evidence on a reason and then withdraws that reason in its statement of case, the application almost writes itself.

Be realistic about the amount. Costs applications recover the expense attributable to the unreasonable behaviour, not the whole appeal.

Asking the authority to clarify

Before appealing, write to the case officer and ask two questions. What evidence does the authority rely on for each reason? And would the authority confirm whether a scheme amended in a stated way would overcome it?

This is not a courtesy. The reply, or the absence of one, becomes part of the appeal documentation, and a council that cannot answer the first question has told you something useful about the appeal.

Where documents are withheld, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 cover most planning material, including internal officer advice and consultee correspondence, subject to exceptions. A request is free and the authority has 20 working days. Officer reports, consultee responses and the committee minutes often reveal that a reason was added at committee without officer support, which is relevant to both the appeal and the prospects where a committee refused against officer advice.

Using thin reasons tactically

A single-reason refusal is the cleanest appeal there is. The issues are narrowed, the council has conceded everything else by implication, and the inspector's decision letter will be short.

Three cautions apply. The inspector can raise new main issues, as above. Third parties can run arguments the council abandoned, and interested persons who made representations are entitled to be heard, which is where third party involvement in an appeal becomes relevant. And a council that realises its reason is weak may simply produce better evidence in its statement of case, since the statement is not limited to what the notice said.

One honest uncertainty: inspectors differ in how far they will go beyond the stated reasons on written representations. Some confine themselves closely to the notice and the representations, others identify main issues more freely. Plan for the broader approach and you will not be caught out.

Illustrative example: a refusal of nine dwellings citing two reasons, highway safety and loss of trees. The highway authority's consultation response had asked for a visibility survey rather than objecting. The appellant supplied the survey, asked the council twice whether the reason was maintained, received no reply, and the council withdrew the reason in its statement of case. At inquiry, the costs application succeeded on that reason alone, and the tree reason was dealt with on its merits.

Draft your appeal statement on PlanScope, then send it for professional review before it goes to the Planning Inspectorate.

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.