When local planning authorities make decisions—whether granting, refusing or imposing conditions on planning permissions—there’s limited scope to appeal. In many cases, the only available remedy is a judicial review planning claim. This legal route challenges the legality (not the merits) of a planning decision made by a public body.
Judicial review planning exists to ensure that planning authorities act lawfully, fairly, and within their powers. But this process is both time-sensitive and procedurally strict. Failing to meet the requirements can result in a claim being dismissed outright, regardless of its underlying strength.
At Salam Immigration, we specialise in helping individuals, landowners, and businesses understand when and how to challenge planning decisions through judicial review planning. This blog provides an in-depth look into how it works, what’s required, and how to maximise your chances of success.
The Pre-action Protocol in Judicial Review Planning
Before launching a judicial review planning claim, claimants are expected to follow the Pre-action Protocol for Judicial Review. This procedural step, though not legally binding, is treated with significant weight by the courts. Its primary purpose is to promote early resolution and avoid unnecessary litigation.
What is the Pre-action Protocol?
The Pre-action Protocol sets out the steps both parties—usually the claimant and the planning authority—should take before formal court proceedings begin. It is designed to:
- Clarify the legal and factual basis of the dispute;
- Give the public body a chance to reconsider its decision;
- Narrow the issues in dispute;
- Save court time and legal costs.
In judicial review planning cases, this protocol must be followed promptly—bearing in mind the strict six-week limitation period. For more information on the Pre-action Protocol visit the official Government website GOV.UK
The Letter Before Claim
The core of the Pre-action Protocol is the Letter Before Claim, which must be sent to the relevant planning authority. This letter should:
- Identify the decision being challenged (including date and reference number);
- Set out the legal grounds for the judicial review planning claim;
- Present the relevant facts;
- Request any additional information or documents;
- Propose a reasonable timeframe for response (usually 14 days);
- Warn that a judicial review planning application will be submitted if no adequate reply is received.
The letter must be clear, concise, and focused. Vague allegations or overly emotive language will undermine credibility.
Response from the Planning Authority
The planning authority is expected to respond substantively to the Letter Before Claim within the proposed timeframe. It may:
- Defend the decision and refuse to reconsider;
- Agree to revisit or amend the decision;
- Offer further explanation or documents that satisfy the claimant’s concerns.
A well-crafted pre-action letter can lead to resolution without needing to proceed with the judicial review planning claim.
When Pre-action Can Be Skipped
There are limited exceptions where the protocol can be omitted:
- Extreme urgency, such as imminent demolition or irreversible environmental impact;
- Risk of the six-week deadline expiring during the pre-action exchange;
- Where delay in the pre-action process could prejudice the claimant’s position.
Even in urgent cases, it is best practice to send a brief Letter Before Claim where time permits and explain to the court why the full protocol was not followed.
Legal Implications of Ignoring the Protocol
Failure to comply with the Pre-action Protocol can lead to:
- The claim being stayed (paused) until the protocol is completed;
- Adverse costs orders against the claimant;
- Judicial criticism in the case record.
In short, following the protocol enhances the credibility and procedural fairness of a judicial review planning claim.
Time Limits for Judicial Review Planning Claims
Strict adherence to judicial Review time limits is essential in any judicial review planning claim. Unlike many other forms of litigation, judicial review is governed by highly specific time constraints that, if missed, can render an otherwise strong case inadmissible.
Statutory Deadline for Planning Judicial Review
Under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) Part 54.5, as amended by the Planning Act 2008 and subsequent judicial review reforms, an application for judicial review in planning matters must be made:
“Promptly and in any event not later than six weeks from the date of the decision.”
This six-week limit applies specifically to decisions involving:
- The grant or refusal of planning permission;
- The approval of planning conditions;
- Decisions on environmental impact assessments;
- Development consent orders under the Planning Act 2008.
Important Clarifications:
- The six-week period starts from the date the decision is issued, not when it is received or published.
- “Promptly” still applies—courts expect you to act well within the six-week limit where possible.
- Any delay, even within the six weeks, may be scrutinised if it appears unjustified.
Why Are Planning Judicial Review Deadlines So Strict?
Planning decisions often trigger rapid changes in land use, construction, or environmental interventions. To prevent uncertainty or disruption to developers and public projects, the law imposes a narrow window for legal challenge.
The courts have emphasised that this six-week limit is absolute and non-extendable, except in the most exceptional cases (e.g. proven incapacity or fraud).
Consequences of Missing the Deadline
If a judicial review planning claim is filed outside the six-week window:
- The court will almost certainly strike it out, regardless of how strong the arguments may be;
- There is no automatic right to request an extension;
- Even filing one day late can render the entire claim invalid;
- Courts are unlikely to be sympathetic to delays due to indecision, ongoing negotiations, or seeking further advice.
Legal Grounds for Judicial Review Planning Claims
In the UK, a judicial review planning claim does not examine whether a planning decision was a “good” one—it focuses solely on lawfulness. The courts are not concerned with planning merits; they assess whether the local authority or decision-maker acted within the limits of their legal powers.
To succeed in a judicial review planning case, claimants must establish that the decision was flawed on one or more recognised legal grounds.
1. Illegality
This occurs when a planning authority:
- Exceeds the powers granted under planning law;
- Misinterprets legislation, policies, or regulations;
- Applies a policy that contradicts national planning guidance or statutory obligations.
Example: Granting planning permission contrary to the Local Development Framework without proper justification may be deemed illegal.
2. Procedural Unfairness
All planning decisions must be made in accordance with rules of natural justice. A judicial review planning claim based on procedural unfairness might arise where:
- A party was denied the opportunity to be heard;
- The decision-maker had a conflict of interest;
- Relevant consultation processes were not followed;
- Late representations were improperly excluded.
Example: If a planning committee ignores last-minute objections without reading or considering them, this may constitute a procedural flaw.
3. Irrationality or Wednesbury Unreasonableness
This ground applies where a decision is so irrational that no reasonable authority, properly directing itself, could have made it.
This is a high threshold—mere disagreement with the outcome or poor reasoning is not enough.
Example: Approving an industrial development in a protected greenbelt area without any exceptional justification might be considered irrational under planning law.
4. Failure to Take Relevant Considerations into Account
Planning authorities must consider all relevant material before reaching a decision. If they fail to do so—or consider irrelevant factors—the decision may be challenged.
Example: Ignoring a flood risk assessment or heritage impact report in a planning application involving a conservation area may justify a judicial review planning claim.
5. Legitimate Expectation
If a local authority has, through clear and consistent practice, led a person to reasonably expect a certain process or outcome, breaching that expectation without justification may be unlawful.
Example: If the planning authority promises to consult residents before granting permission and then skips this step, a legitimate expectation argument may succeed.
6. Human Rights or Environmental Grounds
In rare but increasingly recognised scenarios, a judicial review planning claim may arise from:
- Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life) where a planning decision leads to eviction;
- Environmental law violations where impact assessments were ignored or flawed;
- Unlawful interference with protected habitats or species.
Legal Advice is Crucial
Identifying the correct legal ground is essential. Vague claims or mixing planning objections with legal ones often results in dismissal. A strong judicial review planning claim must be legally focused, factually evidenced, and procedurally correct.
How to File a Judicial Review Planning Claim: Step-by-Step Process
Filing a judicial review planning claim in the UK involves precise procedural steps. Mistakes or omissions at any stage can result in delay, dismissal, or cost penalties. Below is a detailed step-by-step breakdown of how to initiate and progress a judicial review planning application.
Step 1: Seek Legal Advice Immediately
The planning judicial review process is legally technical and time-sensitive. The first and most crucial step is to consult a planning solicitor or public law specialist who understands the complexities of judicial review planning.
A qualified solicitor will:
- Assess whether the case has legal merit;
- Identify the correct grounds of challenge;
- Draft a strong Letter Before Claim;
- Ensure compliance with court rules and deadlines.
Step 2: Draft and Send the Letter Before Claim
As previously outlined, the Pre-action Protocol requires claimants to notify the decision-making body (typically the local planning authority) of their intention to bring a judicial review. The Letter Before Claim must be sent early in the six-week period to allow time for response and filing if needed.
Step 3: Prepare the Judicial Review Planning Claim Form
If the public body’s response is inadequate—or if there’s no response within the stated time—the next step is to file a claim in the Planning Court, which is part of the Administrative Court.
The application must include:
- N461 Claim Form (Judicial Review Claim Form);
- Statement of Facts and Grounds: A concise legal argument explaining why the decision is unlawful;
- Bundle of Documents (evidence bundle): Including the decision being challenged, supporting correspondence, and relevant policy documents;
- Skeleton Argument: A summary of key legal issues;
- Judicial Review Fee: As of the latest guidance, the issue fee is £154.
Step 4: File the Claim Within the Six-Week Deadline
The completed claim must be lodged with the appropriate Administrative Court Office, usually electronically to file an Administrative Court Judicial Review. A copy must also be served on:
- The planning authority;
- Any interested parties, such as developers or landowners.
Proof of service must be filed with the court within 7 days.
Step 5: Permission Stage
Once the claim is filed, the judge undertakes a paper-based review to determine whether permission should be granted. The court will assess:
- Whether the claim is arguable;
- Whether it was filed on time;
- Whether the grounds are properly set out.
If permission is refused:
- You can request an oral renewal hearing within 7 days.
If permission is granted:
- The case proceeds to a substantive hearing.
Step 6: Substantive Hearing
This is a full hearing where both parties present legal arguments before a judge. The court may:
- Quash the planning decision (i.e. render it void);
- Require the planning authority to remake the decision lawfully;
- Dismiss the claim and potentially order costs against the claimant.
Step 7: Post-Hearing Orders and Remedies
If successful, the court may issue:
- A quashing order: Voids the unlawful planning decision;
- A prohibiting order: Prevents further unlawful action;
- A mandatory order: Compels the authority to act (e.g. reconsult).
Costs are usually awarded to the successful party, though the court has discretion.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is judicial review planning?
Judicial review planning is a legal process by which individuals or organisations can challenge the lawfulness—not the merits—of a decision made by a public authority relating to planning. This includes decisions such as granting or refusing planning permission, approving development plans, or failing to follow procedural requirements.
The purpose of judicial review planning is to ensure that planning authorities act within their legal powers, follow fair procedures, and do not make irrational or unlawful decisions.
When can I bring a judicial review planning claim?
You can bring a judicial review planning claim if:
- The decision has been made by a planning authority or similar body;
- There is no other statutory appeal route available or it has been exhausted;
- The decision is arguably unlawful, procedurally unfair, or irrational;
- The claim is filed within six weeks of the decision being issued.
Prompt action is critical. Any delay in initiating a judicial review planning claim may result in automatic dismissal, even if your arguments are strong.
What are the time limits for judicial review planning?
The deadline for filing a judicial review planning claim is:
- Six weeks from the date the decision was made (not from the date it was discovered);
- This is a hard deadline—there is virtually no scope for extension;
- The “promptness” requirement still applies—filing late within the six weeks could still be problematic.
Timely action is a non-negotiable element in judicial review planning cases.
What types of planning decisions can be challenged by judicial review?
You can use judicial review planning to challenge decisions such as:
- Grant or refusal of planning permission;
- Grant of development consent under the Planning Act 2008;
- Approval of environmental or design conditions;
- Adoption of local development plans;
- Failure to take enforcement action;
- Decisions on community infrastructure levies or planning obligations.
If the decision has legal consequences and is made by a public body under planning legislation, it may be open to judicial review planning.
Can I challenge a planning permission granted to a neighbour?
Yes, in some cases. If the decision to grant permission was procedurally unfair, irrational, or made in breach of planning law, you may have standing to bring a judicial review planning claim—particularly if you are directly affected.
You’ll need to show:
- A clear legal basis for the challenge;
- That you acted promptly;
- That your rights or interests are materially impacted.
What are the main legal grounds for judicial review planning?
There are several grounds on which judicial review planning may succeed:
- Illegality: Acting beyond legal powers;
- Procedural unfairness: Failing to consult or consider all relevant inputs;
- Irrationality: Making a decision no reasonable planning authority would make;
- Failure to consider relevant factors: Ignoring reports, assessments or objections;
- Breach of legitimate expectation: Not following established procedures or promises.
Each judicial review planning claim must be firmly rooted in law, not just opposition to the outcome.
What is the Pre-action Protocol in judicial review planning?
The Pre-action Protocol is a formal step that must be followed before filing a judicial review planning claim. It involves sending a Letter Before Claim to the decision-maker setting out:
- The decision being challenged;
- The legal grounds;
- Supporting facts;
- A request for reconsideration or further disclosure.
Complying with the Pre-action Protocol is crucial in judicial review planning to avoid judicial criticism and cost penalties.
What happens if I miss the six-week deadline?
In almost all circumstances, the court will refuse to hear a judicial review planning claim filed after the six-week deadline. The rules are strict, and extensions are granted only in exceptional cases involving serious procedural injustice, fraud, or incapacity.
Missing the deadline typically means:
- You lose your right to challenge the decision;
- The development or plan in question proceeds unimpeded.
Do I need legal representation for judicial review planning?
It is strongly recommended. Judicial review planning is complex, technical, and procedural. Representing yourself can be extremely challenging, and even minor errors in form or timing can derail your claim.
A planning solicitor can:
- Assess whether your case has legal merit;
- Draft the required legal documents;
- File within court deadlines;
- Argue your case in court if permission is granted.
What is the court process for judicial review planning?
Here’s a summary of the court process for judicial review planning:
- Pre-action Protocol: Letter Before Claim sent to authority;
- Filing the Claim: Submit the N461 form and supporting documents within six weeks;
- Permission Stage: The court decides if your claim is arguable;
- Substantive Hearing: If permission is granted, both parties present legal arguments;
- Judgment and Remedies: The court may quash the decision or dismiss the claim.
Throughout, the focus remains on legality—not the planning merits.
Can judicial review planning stop development?
Yes, but only in specific circumstances. If interim relief is granted, such as a stay order, the development may be halted pending the outcome of the judicial review planning case.
To obtain this, you must apply for interim relief when filing your claim, demonstrating:
- Irreversible harm if development proceeds;
- An arguable case on legal grounds;
- That damages would not be an adequate remedy.
What costs are involved in a judicial review planning claim?
Costs include:
- Court fee: £154 for the claim form;
- Legal fees (if represented by solicitors or barristers);
- Potential cost liability if you lose (i.e., paying the planning authority’s legal fees);
- Bundle preparation and service costs.
In some cases, Protective Costs Orders may be sought, especially in environmental judicial review planning claims.
Take Action: Challenge Unlawful Planning Decisions with Confidence
If you’re concerned about a planning decision that appears unlawful, irrational, or procedurally flawed—act now. The window for launching a judicial review planning claim is narrow, and delays can close the door on your right to challenge.
At Salam Immigration, we provide clear, decisive legal support for individuals, residents, developers, and community groups seeking to contest questionable planning outcomes. Whether you’re dealing with a controversial development next door, a denied planning application, or a rushed approval that ignored your objections, our team is ready to advise and act swiftly.Contact us today for Consultation.
