Appealing a Permission in Principle Refusal
How the section 78 appeal process works for a refused permission in principle application, what the Planning Inspectorate will and won't consider, and what a decision looks like.
PLANNING APPEALS
Andrew Ransome
9/13/20265 min read
Whether a site is a sustainable location, whether the authority can demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, or whether the amount of development proposed is appropriate. Alongside that, because permission in principle is used relatively rarely, local planning authorities don't always assess it correctly, and case officers sometimes stray into technical matters that have no place at Stage 1.
Whichever applies, a planning appeal is the route to test the decision.
This article sets out how a permission in principle appeal works, drawing on the Planning Inspectorate's own internal guidance to its Inspectors on this topic.
The right to a planning appeal
A right of appeal exists wherever a direct application for permission in principle is refused, or not determined within the statutory 5-week period (or an agreed extended period).
The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 — exactly the same statutory route as any other refused planning application.
There's no equivalent right of appeal against a local planning authority's decision not to enter a site onto Part 2 of its brownfield land register. If that route is closed off, a direct application (where the development isn't major) or a conventional planning application are the remaining options.
A refusal of, or non-determination on, a technical details consent application can also be appealed under section 78 — regardless of whether the underlying permission in principle was granted by application or via the register.
The April 2026 changes to written representations appeals
Most permission in principle appeals are decided by written representations, so the reforms that took effect on 1 April 2026 matter here.
The Planning Inspectorate's written representations procedure now operates as a two-track system:
Part 1 (expedited) is now the default track for the great majority of written representations appeals, including most refusals of permission in principle and technical details consent.
Part 2 (standard) is reserved for a narrower set of cases — most relevantly for permission in principle, non-determination appeals still follow Part 2, along with listed building consent appeals, discontinuance notice appeals, and appeals against refusal of a biodiversity gain plan.
Given how often permission in principle appeals arise from non-determination — the 5-week statutory period for a decision is tight, and local planning authorities unfamiliar with the route don't always meet it — it's worth knowing which track applies before assuming the expedited procedure will follow.
Under the Part 1 procedure, the reforms bring a "submit once, submit right" principle: the Inspector decides the appeal using only what was before the local planning authority when it made its decision. This includes the application documents, the decision notice, the officer report or committee minutes, the appeal form, and the LPA's questionnaire.
For permission in principle, this raises the stakes on getting the original application statement right — since the case for location, land use and amount of development can't be strengthened or clarified at appeal stage if the application falls under Part 1.
The changes apply to appeals arising from applications made from 1 April 2026 onwards. Applications submitted before that date but decided (and appealed) after it continue to be handled under the previous procedure.
What the Inspectorate will actually consider
Inspectors are directed to confine their assessment of a permission in principle appeal to the same three matters that applied at first instance: location, land use and amount of development.
If a local planning authority's reasons for refusal were really about detailed design, drainage, or ecology — matters that belong at technical details consent — those reasons are unlikely to carry weight on appeal, because they fall outside the scope of what a permission in principle decision is meant to test.
The development plan and the NPPF remain relevant material considerations throughout. A permission in principle appeal is a section 78 appeal like any other, engaging section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
What differs is the scope of what's actually being tested, not the underlying decision-making framework.
No planning conditions
An Inspector allowing a permission in principle appeal cannot impose conditions. That isn't available at this stage of the process.
Where an appeal is allowed, the decision must specify a minimum and maximum net number of dwellings and, where relevant, the scale and use of any non-residential element.
This will usually reflect what was originally applied for.
Statutory duties that still apply
Even though the scope is narrow, certain statutory duties bite regardless.
The duty under section 66(1) of the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act 1990 — to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting — can apply to permission in principle decisions, as does the general duty under section 72(1) regarding conservation areas.
These matters can sit within how "location" and "land use" are properly assessed.
Habitats sites on appeal
Where a proposal could affect a qualifying European site, an Inspector who is otherwise minded to allow a permission in principle appeal should ensure an Appropriate Assessment has been carried out — reverting to the local planning authority and Natural England for their views if one hasn't already been done.
If the Assessment can't conclude there would be no adverse effect on site integrity, the appeal would be dismissed.
Making the planning appeal case
A permission in principle appeal succeeds or fails on whether the site is genuinely suitable in principle. Not on whether every technical detail has been resolved.
The strongest appeal statements keep discipline around that distinction: address location, land use and amount.
Under the 2026 regulations, this discipline matters even more for appeals falling within the Part 1 expedited procedure. The appellant isn't submitting a full grounds of appeal in the way that was possible before 1 April 2026. The appeal form now allows only a short statement of case, and it can't be used to introduce new evidence or expand on what was before the local planning authority.
In practice, that means the justification needs to do its work in a few tightly focused paragraphs setting out where the local planning authority's assessment went wrong.
There's no scope to build a fuller case at appeal stage, so the quality of the original application — and any accompanying statement — carries more weight than it used to.
If you've had a permission in principle application refused and are considering an appeal, get in touch with me to discuss the merits of your case.
Andrew Ransome MRTPI - Email: andrew@andrewransome.co.uk
About me
Andrew Ransome is a Planning Director and a Chartered Member of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), with more than two decades of experience in town planning.
He specialises in delivering strategic planning solutions for complex developments across both rural and urban environments, helping clients navigate planning challenges and unlock development opportunities. Connect with Andrew on Linkedin.
Planning Appeal Information
Permission in Principle Approvals
Get in Touch
Email: andrew@andrewransome.co.uk
Tel: 020 7096 8045
London Office:
60 Tottenham Court Road
Fitzrovia
London
W1T 2EW
© 2026 Andrew Ransome Town Planning Ltd. All rights reserved.
Content on this website is provided for general information and educational purposes only and does not constitute formal planning, professional, or legal advice. Planning policies, legislation, and guidance are subject to change. Site-specific assessment by a qualified consultant is recommended before making development decisions.
Projects highlighted across this website represent professional work undertaken by Andrew Ransome throughout his career.