Appeal 6002405
Public case and site metadata stored from the official casework database, including fields that were empty in the source release.
A clearer next step
See how Inspectors approached issues like yours
Bring your planning decision into a private workspace. We separate the disputed points, then match them with source-located Inspector reasoning from similar appeals.
- See which issues the decision appears to turn on
- Compare the facts and open the full appeal records
One private comparison
How the refusal review worksOne-off service · No subscription
Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.
Official decision document
The decision, section by section
3 sections
Read the development description and the Inspector’s text from the official decision PDF in source order. Source headings are retained where available. Personal and contact details are removed by an automated privacy filter; this is source material, not Rules for You analysis.
Section 01
Development description
to [name].
Section 02
Decision
[name], B and C are invalid, and I am unable to proceed to consider the planning merits of the cases.
Section 03
Reasons
Three appeals1 for a largely similar development to the schemes before me, including 3 cow sheds were previously dismissed. During the course of these previous appeals concerns were raised as to whether the correct Certificate of Ownership had been provided, as the section of land between the field boundary 1 Appeal Reference: APP/H1515/W/24/3347697, APP/H1515/W/24/3347699 and APP/H1515/W/24/3347702 and the highway, forming the access into the site for each of the appeal proposals is unregistered.
The previous appeals concluded that although the piece of land in question was not registered with the [name], that it was owned by the appellant and that the correct Certificate had been provided. I have not been provided with any further information to the contrary and therefore have no reason to disagree.
The site plans related to the appeals before me, do not include the piece of land mentioned above within the red line boundary for the developments, instead the red line stops at the field boundary.
Article 7 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 sets out the particulars that must accompany an application. This includes a requirement for a plan which identifies the land to which the application relates. The Government provides advice on validity requirements in the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG). It explains that the submission of a valid application for planning permission requires, amongst other things, compliance with national information requirements. The PPG2 stipulates that: “The application site should be edged clearly with a red line on the location plan. It should include all land necessary to carry out the proposed development (e.g. land required for access to the site from a public highway, visibility splays, landscaping, car parking and open areas around buildings). A blue line should be drawn around any other land owned by the applicant, close to or adjoining the application site.”
I note that the appellant intends to use the existing field gate entrance and that it is asserted that no works are required to upgrade it. Nevertheless, the piece of land in question is necessary to carry out the proposed developments by providing physical access from the public highway to the site, and as such must be included within the red line boundary.
The failure to comply with the PPG means that the applications are invalid. Consequently, [name], B and C should not continue, and I am unable to consider the planning merits of the schemes.
Planning inspector and document dates
The official casework attribution is grouped under a one-way keyed hash and shown only by its local identifier. Decision-letter dates and page references are extracted by fixed first-page rules and checked against that authoritative record.
Appeal Decision
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 22 April 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 7 April 2026 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6002405
- Application reference
- 25/00962
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Brentwood Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000068
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Other minor developments
- Appeal type reason
- Not recorded
- Appeal reason
- not_received
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Jurisdiction
- No Jurisdiction Associated
- Link status
- Not recorded
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- 0 hectares
- Floor space
- 8,100 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- Yes
- Agricultural holding
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Yes
- Historic building grant made
- Not recorded
- Relates to a conservation area
- Not recorded
- Flooding is an issue
- Not recorded
- Site within an AONB
- No
- Site within an SSSI
- Not recorded
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 9 December 2025
- Valid date
- 9 December 2025
- Start date
- 13 January 2026
- Planning authority decision date
- 8 October 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 22 April 2026
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- Not recorded
- Bespoke
- Not recorded
- Date recovered
- Not recorded
- Date not recovered or derecovered
- Not recorded
- Call-in date
- Not recorded
- Costs applied for
- No
- Enforcement grounds count
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds
- Not recorded
Source and catalogue history
When this record appeared in the rolling official release and when the catalogue stored it.
- Source
- Planning Inspectorate casework database
- Source data system
- Back Office-s78
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 87706
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:29
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 20 August 2026 at 16:29