A statement of case for a written representations appeal

In a written representations appeal your statement is the whole of your case. There is no hearing at which to explain a point the inspector has misread, and no advocate to answer a question from the chair. So the appeal statement of case structure has to do two jobs at once: set out the argument, and anticipate what the council will say in reply.

Write it around the reasons for refusal. Every other organising principle produces a document that reads well and leaves the inspector to do your sorting for you.

What the statement has to do

The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and the inspector decides it afresh on the planning merits. That means the statement must positively make the case for permission, in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise, as section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires.

It also has to be complete when you send it. In the written procedure the appellant's full statement goes in with the appeal form, and the opportunity to add material later is limited to commenting on what others have said. An inspector will not chase you for the drawing you meant to include.

Deadlines are hard. Six months from the date of the decision notice for most refusals, twelve weeks for householder appeals, and shorter periods against enforcement notices. The Inspectorate has no discretion to accept a late appeal.

Identifying the main issues

Start with the decision notice and take each reason for refusal literally. Councils sometimes bundle three complaints into one reason, and each limb needs its own answer.

Then read the officer's report. The report tells you what the case officer actually thought, which is often narrower than the reason as drafted by the committee. Where members refused against officer advice, the report is your strongest material, because it is the authority's own professional assessment that the scheme was acceptable.

Note what is not in dispute. If highways, drainage and ecology were all resolved at application stage, say so early and cite the consultee responses. An inspector reading a statement that argues nine points cannot tell which two matter.

Structuring the argument

A structure that works, in order:

1. The site, its designations and its planning history, kept short and factual.
2. The proposal, with a drawing schedule that matches the drawings before the council.
3. The policy framework: development plan policies by number, relevant national policy by its current edition, and any supplementary guidance.
4. The main issues, taken from the reasons for refusal in the order the council gave them.
5. Your case on each issue, with the evidence attached.
6. Other material considerations, including any fallback position.
7. Conditions offered, drafted in full.

The conditions point is underused. Offering a worded condition that resolves the council's concern, with a note on why it meets the six tests, gives the inspector a route to allowing the appeal that does not require them to disagree with the authority outright.

Where the refusal turned on design, the material you prepared for the Design and Access Statement is the backbone of that section, updated to answer the criticism rather than restating the original description.

Dealing with each reason for refusal

Answer in the same structure each time: what the council says, what the policy actually requires, what the evidence shows, and what follows.

Do not argue that the council was unreasonable to refuse. That belongs in a costs application, not in the planning case, and it reads badly when mixed into the merits.

Where the refusal cites harm to neighbour amenity, quantify it. A Daylight and Sunlight Assessment against the BRE 209 (2022) guidance turns a disagreement about whether a room will be gloomy into a set of numbers the inspector can test. The same applies to the 45-degree line, sightlines from windows and the separation distances in the council's own design guide.

Where the refusal cites conflict with a policy, quote the policy in full. Officers sometimes paraphrase a policy in a way that hardens a criterion, and the inspector will notice if the wording is more permissive than the reason suggests.

A worked illustration: a rear extension refused for excessive depth in a conservation area, where the officer's report accepted the design and materials but the committee added harm to the street scene. The statement runs two issues only, the depth against the adopted householder design guide and the effect on the conservation area, attaches a street elevation showing three comparable extensions granted in the same terrace, and offers a condition on materials. Those comparables are illustrative rather than drawn from a real case.

Using other appeal decisions

Appeal decisions are indicative of how inspectors have approached an issue. They are not binding precedent, and an inspector is entitled to reach a different view on different facts.

Use them sparingly and only where the facts are close. Attach the full decision letter rather than a paragraph in isolation, and say in one sentence what the parallel is. Three well-chosen decisions carry more weight than a schedule of fifteen.

Judgments of the courts are different in kind. Where a case settles the meaning of a policy or a statutory term, cite it properly by name and neutral citation.

Costs applications

Costs in planning appeals are awarded for unreasonable behaviour, not for losing. The Planning Practice Guidance on appeals divides that into substantive unreasonableness, such as refusing without evidence or failing to produce evidence to support a reason for refusal, and procedural unreasonableness, such as delay or introducing a new reason late.

In the written procedure the application must be made in writing within the period for representations, so decide early rather than after the decision arrives. Set it out as a separate document, identify the specific behaviour, the policy or evidence the council failed to produce, and the wasted expense that followed.

Be realistic. A council that refused with a reasoned officer report against you has behaved reasonably even if the inspector disagrees with it.

Timetable and what happens if you miss it

Once the appeal is valid the Inspectorate issues a start date and a timetable. The council submits its questionnaire and its statement, interested parties make representations, and you get a window to comment on what has been said. The periods are set out in the Inspectorate's procedural guide for written representations, and they are enforced.

Miss a deadline and the material is simply not before the inspector. There is no reading it into the record afterwards.

Then there is the site visit, usually unaccompanied unless the inspector needs access to private land or a specific viewpoint. Make sure any viewpoint your case relies on can actually be reached from public land, or request an accompanied visit and say why.

If the appeal succeeds, permission issues with the inspector's conditions. If it fails, the decision letter tells you precisely which argument did not land, which is the most useful document you will get for a revised application. A well-evidenced Planning Statement drafted from that decision letter is usually a better investment than a second appeal on the same scheme. Browse the supporting document types if you need to work out what evidence a resubmission should carry, or enter your postcode on PlanScope to see what the site is likely to need.

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.