170,203 planning appeals indexed

Find planning appeals in seconds

The UK's most comprehensive planning appeal search engine. Search, filter, and analyse appeal decisions with AI-powered insights — built for planning professionals.

No credit card required. 14-day free trial.

The UK's Most Comprehensive Planning Appeal Database

0
Planning Appeals
0+
Local Authorities
0+
Unique Appellants
0%
Appeals Allowed
0
Decision Documents

Latest appeal decisions

The most recent planning appeals, summarised by AI.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — Nottingham

2026/0174

United Carpets, Nottingham, NG5 6AJ

The appeal decision concerns a proposal by Mr. R Harrison for an advertisement sign at 31 Mansfield Road, Daybrook, Nottinghamshire, which was refused by Gedling Borough Council. The appeal was made under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 2007, specifically addressing the installation of an internally illuminated signboard measuring 18sqm. The main issue identified by the Inspector was the impact of the proposed advertisement on local amenity. The Inspector noted that decisions regarding advertisements must prioritize amenity and public safety, referencing relevant local and national policies, including Policy LPD 32 of the Local Planning Document 2018 and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The Inspector described the site as a modern retail unit situated in a predominantly urban, commercial area, characterized by various existing signs. The proposed sign, a freestanding illuminated board, would be significantly larger than the existing signage and positioned in a way that would make it particularly obtrusive from the north and northeast, especially at a nearby junction. The Inspector concluded that the sign's size and illumination would result in disproportionate visual dominance in the street scene, conflicting with local policies aimed at preserving visual amenity. Despite noting the presence of other signs in the area, the Inspector found that the specific characteristics of the proposed sign were not comparable to those of existing signage. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the Inspector concluded that the proposed sign would cause significant harm to the amenity of the area.

Planning appeal — Edinburgh

ENA-230-2475

2F2 18 Dean Street, Edinburgh, EH4 1LW

The appeal decision letter pertains to an enforcement notice appeal concerning the property at 2F2 18 Dean Street, Stockbridge, Edinburgh. The appeal was initiated by Mrs. J Victor against a decision made by the City of Edinburgh Council. The main issue at hand was the enforcement notice issued by the Council, which likely addressed unauthorized developments or breaches of planning regulations at the specified address. However, on 24 September 2026, Mrs. Victor communicated her intention not to proceed with the appeal. Key arguments from the case are not detailed in the letter, as the appeal was withdrawn before any substantive discussion or reasoning could take place. Consequently, the Reporter's reasoning is absent, as the appeal was not pursued further. The final decision, as stated in the letter, is the acceptance of the withdrawal of the appeal, leading to no further action on the matter. The City of Edinburgh Council has been informed of this decision, effectively concluding the appeal process. No specific conditions were outlined in the letter, as the appeal was withdrawn prior to any determination or imposition of conditions. The correspondence serves primarily to confirm the withdrawal and clarify the status of the appeal.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — the UK

PL/2000/25

121 Cambridge Road, HA2 7LB

The appeal decision concerns a proposed development at 121 Cambridge Road, Harrow, which included ground floor front and rear extensions, a porch, a first-floor side and rear extension, and alterations to an existing loft dormer. The London Borough of Harrow refused the planning application, leading to the appeal by Mr. Arun Selvaraj. The main issues identified by the Inspector were the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area, the living conditions of neighboring properties (119 and 123 Cambridge Road), and the potential for increased flooding in the area. The Inspector found that the proposed rear dormer would be disproportionately large and irregular, conflicting with local design guidelines and detracting from the character of the area. Additionally, the single-storey rear extension was deemed too dominant, obstructing light and outlook for the neighboring properties, which would result in an overbearing effect. The Inspector noted that a fallback position from a prior approval for a smaller extension would be less harmful to the neighbors' living conditions. Regarding flooding, the proposal was considered likely to increase surface water runoff without adequate drainage measures, conflicting with policies aimed at managing flood risks. Ultimately, the Inspector dismissed the appeal, concluding that the proposed development would harm the character of the area, negatively impact the living conditions of neighbors, and increase flooding risks. No conditions were imposed as the appeal was dismissed outright.

Planning appeal — Forfar

WAY-505-61 (Wayleave)

Broom Farm, Forfar

The Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA) has confirmed the withdrawal of a wayleave application related to Broom Farm, Tannadice, Forfar, as communicated in correspondence dated 18 September 2026. The application was associated with the planning authority reference LT455-106. The main issue at hand was the necessity of the wayleave for the proposed development. However, the withdrawal indicates that the parties involved, including the landowner, MFMac, and Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission Plc, have decided not to proceed with the application. The key argument leading to this decision appears to stem from the consensus among the stakeholders regarding the wayleave's relevance or necessity for the intended project. The DPEA has stated that it will take no further action in this matter, effectively closing the case. In conclusion, the DPEA has formally acknowledged the withdrawal of the wayleave application and has indicated that no further proceedings will occur. Stakeholders have been advised to reach out with any queries they may have regarding this decision.

Allowed

Appeal Allowed — Selborne

SDNP/25/04098/CND

Albury Dairy, Selborne, GU33 6BX

The appeal decision concerns a request by Dr. William Selborne of the Blackmoor Estate to modify conditions attached to a previous planning permission for the change of use of an agricultural building to Class B8 storage at Albury Dairy, Honey Lane, Selborne, within the South Downs National Park. The appeal was prompted by the South Downs National Park Authority's failure to decide on the application within the prescribed period. The main issues revolved around the impact of proposed changes to operating hours and the removal of specific conditions aimed at protecting the living conditions of nearby residents and the tranquillity of the National Park. The appellant sought to extend operating hours and remove conditions related to noise control, including the use of white noise reversing alarms, the requirement for electric plant, noise level restrictions, and limits on HGV movements. The Inspector concluded that while some conditions could be relaxed, particularly regarding the use of electric plant, others were necessary to mitigate noise and disturbance. The proposed extension of operating hours was deemed acceptable, as it would not significantly impact local amenity. However, conditions regarding reversing alarms, noise levels, and HGV movements were retained to ensure protection against potential disturbances. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, granting permission for the change of use with a variation to condition 4 (operating hours) and the removal of condition 6 (electric plant requirement), while maintaining conditions 5, 7, and 8 to safeguard local amenity and tranquillity.

Everything you need for appeal research

Stop spending hours trawling through the Planning Inspectorate website. Find the precedents you need in seconds.

Powerful Search

Full-text search with advanced filtering by decision type, local authority, date range, and more.

Comprehensive Database

Over 350,000 planning appeal decisions from the Planning Inspectorate, fully indexed and searchable.

PDF Document Access

View original appeal decision letters and documents directly in the browser.

Save & Bookmark

Bookmark appeals for later reference and build your own library of relevant decisions.

Team Collaboration

Invite team members, share bookmarks, and collaborate on appeal research together.

AI-Powered Insights

Chat with appeal documents using AI. Ask questions and get instant answers from any decision letter.

What's New — September 2026

The latest features and improvements shipped to Claw.

Cancel & Resume Your Plan

New

Cancel your subscription right from your account — you keep full access until the end of your paid term, it won’t auto-renew, and you can resume in one click if you change your mind.

Up-to-Date Appeal Decisions

Improvement

New Planning Inspectorate (England) decisions are captured and kept current automatically, with decision letters restored across recent appeals.

Smoother Appeal Viewer

Improvement

The decision viewer now closes reliably and shows a clear message when a decision letter isn’t available yet, instead of hanging.

Trusted by planning professionals

See what our users are saying about Claw.

“We've recently started using Claw, an app designed to help find appeal decisions and have been really impressed by it. It has a load of useful features with search filters that allow you to search by constraints, authorities and type of appeal to find relevant appeal decisions easily and quickly. We'd highly recommend this app!”
PlanIt Consulting

Planning Consultancy

“The Eden team is always looking for ways to efficiently clear and pragmatic planning solutions for our clients and using CLAW enables us to do this.”
Eden Planning & Development Ltd

Planning & Development Consultancy

“It's a great app!”

Peter

Planning Professional

“We love Claw!”

Olivia

Planning Professional

“Hear hear, great app!”

Caroline

Planning Professional

“It's a game changer!”

Mark

Planning Professional

Simple, transparent pricing

Start with a 14-day free trial. No credit card required.

Standard

For planning professionals

£495/yr

£41.25/mo — save £93/yr

  • Unlimited search queries
  • Full planning appeal database access
  • PDF document viewing
  • Save searches and bookmarks
  • Team collaboration (up to 5 members)
  • AI Chat with Appeals
Most Popular

Premium

For power users who need AI assistance

£595/yr

£49.58/mo — save £113/yr

  • Everything in Standard
  • AI Chat with Appeals
  • Ask questions about any appeal document
  • Get instant AI-powered insights
  • Priority support

Cancel anytime. All plans include a 14-day money-back guarantee.

Lisa Rasch, Founder of Claw

Lisa Rasch MRTPI

Founder, Claw App | Director, Freedom Planning and Design

A practicing planning consultant and the founder of CLAW — a planning appeals intelligence platform transforming how planners, consultants and local planning authorities engage with appeal data.

With a 100% success rate across her consultancy work, Lisa is trusted by homeowners, developers, architects and local authorities for her clarity, integrity and expertise. As a woman leading a fast-growing PlanTech company in a traditionally male-dominated sector, she brings together deep professional experience, commercial insight and a genuine drive to bridge the gap between policy, practice and technology.

Named one of The Planner's Women of Influence three years running.

The Planner's Women of Influence 2026

Frequently asked questions

Everything you need to know about searching planning appeals with Claw.

Book a demo

Want to see Claw in action? Schedule a personalised demo with our team.