173,268 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

P/2026/0310

33 Sherwell Hill, TQ2 6LU

The appeal decision concerns a proposal by Mr. M Etherington for the construction of a detached garage at 33 Sherwell Hill, Torquay, which was refused by Torbay Council. The main issues evaluated by the Inspector were the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the area, highway safety, and the living conditions of neighboring properties at Nos. 31 and 35. The Inspector found that the proposed garage would significantly detract from the cohesive character of the existing terrace due to its height, length, and box-like form, which would dominate the open character of the rear gardens. The garage would appear as a substantial structure, conflicting with Local Plan Policies DE1 and TNP Policy TH8, which emphasize well-designed developments that respect local character. Regarding living conditions, the Inspector noted that the garage would have an overbearing effect on the neighboring properties, leading to a loss of outlook and increased overshadowing, thereby violating Local Plan Policy DE3. On highway safety, the proposed structure would obstruct visibility for vehicles exiting the garage, creating an unacceptable risk, contrary to Local Plan Policy TA2. Despite some minor economic benefits from construction, the Inspector concluded that these were outweighed by the adverse impacts identified. Ultimately, the proposal was found to conflict with the development plan and was dismissed, with no conditions attached as the appeal was entirely rejected.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — the UK

26/00184/FUL

1 Weston Close, LE2 4UW

The appeal decision concerns a planning application made by Mr. I Aslam for alterations to a dwelling at 1 Weston Close, Oadby, which included increasing the roof height and adding a rear dormer. The main issue identified by the Inspector was the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of both the dwelling and the surrounding area. The Inspector noted that while the overall design of the dwelling and its increased height would not be incongruous within the varied residential context, the proposed rear dormer was problematic. Its large scale, flat-roofed design, and positioning would dominate the rear roof and appear obtrusive from surrounding streets, conflicting with local design policies aimed at maintaining high-quality development that reflects local character. Despite acknowledging a minor benefit from the additional floorspace created by the development, the Inspector concluded that this was outweighed by the moderate harm caused to the character and appearance of the area. The proposal was found to conflict with Policies 6 and 44 of the Oadby & Wigston Local Plan, as well as the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidelines. Ultimately, the Inspector dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the adverse effects of the development substantially outweighed any benefits, and there were no compelling reasons to deviate from the development plan.

Allowed

Appeal Allowed — Saffron Walden

UTT/26/0696/HHF

Lismore, Saffron Walden, CB11 4UU

The appeal decision concerns the installation of solar panels at Lismore, Woodmans Lane, Duddenhoe End, Essex, following a refusal by Uttlesford District Council. The main issue was whether the proposal would preserve the setting of the adjacent grade II listed building, Forge Cottage. The Inspector noted that the solar panels would be placed on the west-facing roof slope of Lismore, which is a relatively new house designed to reflect traditional architecture. The Council's refusal was based on concerns that the panels would detract from the setting of Forge Cottage due to their location, materials, and proximity. However, the Inspector found that the panels would be flush with the roof and would not obscure views of Forge Cottage from most angles. Although there would be some incongruity in views from Woodmans Lane, the overall impact on the setting was assessed as resulting in a very low level of harm. The Inspector emphasized the importance of balancing this low level of harm against the public benefits of renewable energy. The Framework's policies on heritage assets and low carbon energy sources were considered, leading to the conclusion that the benefits of the solar panels outweighed the minimal harm to the listed building's setting. In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, granting planning permission for the solar panels, subject to conditions including a three-year commencement time limit and adherence to specified plans. The decision aligns with the Uttlesford Local Plan and national planning policies.

Dismissed

Appeal Dismissed — the UK

EPF/0508/26

26 Station Road, IG10 4NX

The appeal decision letter concerns a planning application by Mr. Ashish Sood for the partial demolition and construction of extensions at 26 Station Road, Loughton, which was refused by Epping Forest District Council. 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, and the living conditions of the occupants of the adjacent property at 22 Station Road, particularly regarding outlook. The Inspector found that the proposed two-storey rear extension, characterized by a flat roof, would not harmonize with the existing dwelling's proportions and would appear incongruous within the overall composition. Despite the use of matching materials, the extension's scale and bulk would dominate the host dwelling, causing moderate harm to the area's character. Additionally, the extension's proximity to No. 22 would obstruct the existing open outlook from that property, resulting in a sense of enclosure and an overbearing presence. The Inspector acknowledged some benefits of the proposal, such as additional internal space and short-term economic gains during construction. However, these were deemed insufficient to outweigh the identified harms. The development was found to conflict with relevant local policies and the National Planning Policy Framework, which emphasizes high-quality design and consideration of neighboring amenity. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, with the Inspector concluding that the adverse effects of the proposal significantly outweighed any potential benefits, reinforcing the need for development to align with established planning policies.

Allowed

Appeal Allowed — the UK

25/01254/FUL

155 Kensington Road, SS1 2SZ

The appeal decision concerns a planning application by Miss Mulikat Shokeye for a hip to gable roof extension with a rear dormer, a single-storey rear extension, and front rooflights at 155 Kensington Road, Southend-on-Sea. The Southend-on-Sea Borough Council had previously refused this application, prompting the appeal under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The main issue identified by the Inspector was the impact of the proposed development on the character, appearance, and amenity of the streetscene and surrounding area. The Inspector noted that the site is a semi-detached house in a predominantly residential area, with some commercial uses nearby. Most of the proposed development had already been completed, and a similar rear extension had been previously approved. The Inspector deemed the differences between the approved and proposed developments as insignificant, asserting that they would not adversely affect neighboring properties. Concerns raised by interested parties included potential structural issues and the fear of the property being converted into a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). The Inspector clarified that structural matters are civil issues and that concerns about the HMO were speculative and not relevant to the planning decision. Ultimately, the Inspector concluded that the design and scale of the development would not significantly harm the character or appearance of the area, allowing the appeal and granting planning permission. No additional conditions were deemed necessary, as the development was largely complete.

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.