Giving the leading judgement Lord Justice Etherton (Lord Justice Mummery and Mr Justice Hedley concurring) reiterated that the required degree of particularity as to reasons depends entirely on the nature of the issues falling for decision. In this case he held that the inspector failed to give any reasons for rejecting the analysis and conclusions in the appellant’s expert’s report.  This failure to do so left the appellant in doubt as to the potential for a future application. Lord Justice Etherton held that decision letter left the appellant materially in the dark about its impact on obtaining some alternative planning permission in relation to the noise issue addressed in condition that was being challenged.

The judgement is also a salutary warning to ensure that even in the most basic (and increasingly common) form of planning appeals the courts will not require planning inspectors to search around to find alternative solutions or invite further representations from the parties to save or vary a planning permission to the advantage of an appellant. The onus is on an appellant and/or his advisors to ensure that all options are properly explored before an inspector. This means that appeal representations should be thorough prepared and parties should be careful to consider whether they have explored all aspects of their appeal in the material upon which they rely.