170,970 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 — the UK

ENA-230-2462

Land 24M South Of 56 Old Burdiehouse Road, EH17 8BH

The appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by the City of Edinburgh Council regarding a site at 24 meters south of 56 Old Burdiehouse Road, Edinburgh. The notice alleged a material change of use of the land for storage, a workshop, and a personal fitness studio, alongside operational developments including the erection of an industrial shed and hard surfacing. The main issues revolved around whether the alleged breaches of planning control were immune from enforcement action under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, and whether the steps required by the enforcement notice were excessive. The Reporter found that the uses of the land had not been established for the requisite ten years to claim immunity and thus upheld the enforcement notice. However, he determined that certain elements, such as the industrial shed and associated hardstanding, were immune from enforcement action due to their substantial nature and completion prior to the initial enforcement action. In terms of the steps outlined in the enforcement notice, the Reporter concluded that while the requirement to cease the unauthorized uses was justified, the demands to remove the industrial shed and all hard surfacing were excessive. Consequently, he varied the enforcement notice to require only the removal of hard surfacing from the southern part of the site and restoration of that area, excluding the boundary treatment. Ultimately, the appeal was upheld in part, with the enforcement notice maintained but modified as specified. The Reporter noted that the appellant's lack of awareness of the need for permissions was not a relevant factor in his assessment.

Planning appeal — the UK

PPA-230-2871

2B Northumberland Street, EH3 6LW

On 2 July 2026, the City of Edinburgh Council refused a retrospective planning application (No: 26/01156/FULSTL) for a change of use from residential to short-term let accommodation at 2B Northumberland Street, Edinburgh. The refusal was based on two main issues: the detrimental impact on local amenity and the loss of residential accommodation. The Council cited that the proposal contravened Local Development Plan Policy Hou 6, which addresses inappropriate uses in residential areas, stating that the short-term let would materially harm the living conditions of nearby residents. Additionally, it was found to be contrary to National Planning Framework 4 Policy 30(e), as the loss of the residential property was not justified and would negatively affect local amenity. The Reporter's reasoning emphasized that while the economic benefits of tourist accommodation were acknowledged, they did not outweigh the adverse effects on residential amenity or the loss of housing. The proposal was deemed unacceptable under both the Development Plan and national policies, with no material considerations found to outweigh these conclusions. The decision does not grant any necessary approvals under other statutory enactments, and the applicant has the right to request a review of the decision within three months. The Council's decision highlights the balance between economic development and the preservation of residential living conditions in urban areas.

Recovered

Appeal Recovered — Ilford

APP/W5780/C/25/3372932

Land at 2-4, Land on the South Side of High Road and, Ilford, IG3 8AA

The appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by the London Borough of Redbridge against Mr. Daljit Johal of Southwill Limited for alleged unauthorized construction and use of three workshop structures for car repair and spray painting at a site in Seven Kings, Ilford. The notice required the removal of the structures, cessation of vehicle repair services, and restoration of the land. The main issues identified by the Inspector were the clarity of the allegation regarding the breach of planning control and the consistency between the allegation and the requirements of the enforcement notice. The Inspector noted that the notice did not specify that the change of use was “material,” which is essential for a valid allegation. Furthermore, the requirements were inconsistent, as they included a cessation of vehicle servicing, which was not part of the original allegation. The Inspector reasoned that while corrections could be made to the notice, doing so would expand the scope of the breach and create potential injustice to the appellant. The requirement for the land to be left in a "tidy condition" was also deemed subjective and open-ended. Ultimately, the Inspector concluded that the enforcement notice lacked sufficient clarity and could not be corrected without causing injustice, leading to the decision to quash the notice. As a result, the appeal was upheld, and the enforcement notice was invalidated. The Inspector indicated that the Council could issue a new enforcement notice if desired.

Recovered

Appeal Recovered — Kent

APP/U2235/C/26/3378504

Pear View, Kent, ME18 6HA

The planning appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by Maidstone Borough Council against Mr. Alfred Brazil for alleged unauthorized residential use of land at Pear View, Yalding, Kent. The notice, issued on 12 March 2026, cited a material change of use from agriculture to residential, involving the stationing of a static caravan, construction of a bungalow, a dayroom, and a garage/workshop, along with extensive hard surfacing. Key issues included the accuracy of the notice in describing the alleged breach of planning control. The Inspector noted discrepancies, particularly in the characterization of the residential use, which suggested a single household despite evidence indicating two separate households. The Inspector also questioned the classification of the bungalow as part of a single residential use with the caravan, as it functioned as a self-contained dwelling. The Inspector found that the notice lacked clarity regarding the relationship between the various structures and their intended uses, leading to potential injustice if corrections were made. Consequently, the enforcement notice was deemed invalid due to these inaccuracies. Ultimately, the Inspector quashed the enforcement notice, concluding that the appeals on the grounds of planning permission and other related matters did not need to be considered, as the notice itself was invalid.

Quashed

Appeal Quashed — the UK

APP/J0350/C/25/3373976

62 Faraday Road, SL2 1RU

The appeal decision concerns an enforcement notice issued by Slough Borough Council against Mr. Nawaz Jan for the unauthorized erection of a self-contained building at 62 Faraday Road, Slough. The notice required the cessation of the building's use as a dwelling, removal of kitchen and shower facilities, demolition of the building, and clearance of the site. The appeal was made under grounds (a) and (f) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Inspector identified several main issues: the development's impact on the character and appearance of the area, the living conditions for future occupants, the effects on neighboring properties, and highway safety. The Inspector found that the building's design and location were incompatible with the surrounding residential character, contributing to a cramped environment and visual discord. The internal space was deemed inadequate, failing to meet minimum living standards, and lacked sufficient outdoor amenity space. The development was also found to negatively impact the living conditions of neighbors due to increased noise and disturbance from additional activity. Furthermore, the lack of off-street parking exacerbated local parking pressures, raising concerns about highway safety. Ultimately, the Inspector dismissed the appeal, upheld the enforcement notice, and refused the deemed planning application, citing conflicts with local planning policies and the absence of material considerations to warrant a different decision. The appeal on ground (f) was also dismissed, as the requirements of the notice were deemed necessary to remedy the breach.

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.