From 1 April 2026, the planning appeals system in England changed significantly.
Most planning appeals made under section 78(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, relating to applications submitted on or after that date, will now initially follow the Part 1 Written Representations procedure, also referred to as the expedited procedure.
The changes have been introduced through the Town and Country Planning (Appeals) (Written Representations Procedure) (England) (Amendment and Saving Provision) Regulations 2026.
The intention is straightforward: to create a quicker and more streamlined appeal process by ensuring that, in most cases, an appeal is determined on substantially the same evidential basis as the planning application considered by the Local Planning Authority (LPA). But while the new system may appear to be a relatively simple procedural change, its practical implications are potentially significant.
The appeal stage previously provided an opportunity for appellants to develop their case, respond to the reasons for refusal and, in some circumstances, provide additional technical information. Under the new Part 1 procedure, that opportunity is considerably more limited.
The message for applicants, agents and developers is therefore increasingly clear: Submit once. Submit right.
If there is a realistic prospect that an application may need to be appealed, the evidence needed to support the proposal should be in place before the LPA makes its decision.
What is the new Part 1 Written Representations procedure?
The Written Representations procedure remains one of the principal ways in which planning appeals are determined. However, the 2026 reforms significantly expand the use of the expedited Part 1 procedure.
The Planning Inspectorate’s current guidance confirms that most appeals relating to applications submitted on or after 1 April 2026 will initially follow Part 1. This includes a wide range of section 78(1) appeals, including appeals relating to:
- refusals of planning permission;
- grants of planning permission subject to conditions;
- refusals of prior approval;
- refusals of advertisement consent;
- refusals to approve reserved matters;
- refusals of applications under section 73 to vary or remove planning conditions;
- refusals relating to development already carried out under section 73A; and
- permission in principle and technical details consent.
The Planning Inspectorate retains discretion to transfer an appeal to another procedure where appropriate. Depending on the circumstances, an appeal may instead proceed under the Part 2 Written Representations procedure. However, the starting point for most eligible appeals is now Part 1.
The fundamental change: the appeal is not an opportunity to rebuild the case
The most important feature of the new procedure is that new evidence cannot generally be introduced at the appeal stage. For a Part 1 appeal, the Inspector will principally consider the material that was before the LPA when it determined the planning application.
This includes:
- the planning application;
- plans and drawings;
- supporting documents and technical reports;
- consultation responses;
- representations made during the application process;
- the LPA’s decision notice and reasons for refusal; and
- other relevant application material.
The appellant does not have the same opportunity to submit a detailed appeal statement supported by additional reports and evidence. Instead, the appellant explains why they disagree with the decision in a very concise way.
The LPA will also not normally submit a traditional appeal statement setting out an expanded case against the proposal, even if this is a decision made by Planning Committee against recommendation of the Council’s planning officers. The process is designed to rely on the reasons for refusal and the information submitted through the appeal process, including the LPA’s questionnaire and application documentation.
Under the new procedure, appellants should not assume that a weak point in an application can be addressed later through:
- a new highways report;
- an updated ecological survey;
- a heritage assessment;
- a viability report;
- revised technical information;
- amended plans; or
- a detailed statement specifically designed to overcome a reason for refusal.
If the evidence was not before the LPA when it made its decision, there is no opportunity to introduce it during a Part 1 appeal. In those circumstances, a fresh or revised planning application may sometimes provide a more appropriate route than attempting to use the appeal process to correct deficiencies in the original submission.
The key question is no longer simply:
“Do we disagree with the refusal?”
It will be:
“Is the application that was actually determined strong enough to succeed on appeal without adding anything new?”
Third parties must make their views known at application stage
The changes also affect local residents, community groups and other interested parties. For appeals proceeding under the Part 1 procedure, interested parties generally do not have an opportunity to submit fresh comments once the appeal has been lodged.
Instead, the representations submitted during the planning application process will be forwarded to the Planning Inspectorate and considered by the Inspector. This makes participation at application stage more important than ever.
The Planning Inspectorate’s guidance makes clear that, for these appeals, comments made during the application stage form the basis of third-party participation, although an interested person may withdraw an earlier representation.
Section 106 agreements: timing now matters more than ever
One of the most important practical issues arising from the new procedure concerns Section 106 agreements and planning obligations. Under the Planning Inspectorate’s current guidance, where a planning obligation is required in connection with a Written Representations appeal, the appellant must ensure that an executed and certified copy is submitted at the time the appeal is made.
The guidance also makes clear that an Inspector will not normally delay the issue of a decision while parties complete an outstanding obligation, except in very exceptional circumstances.
This means that appellants should not assume they can lodge an appeal and then finalise the Section 106 agreement later. If the obligation is central to making the development acceptable, leaving it unresolved until after the appeal has been submitted could place the appeal at significant risk.
What happens to the old Written Representations process?
The previous, fuller Written Representations procedure has not disappeared.
Instead, the 2009 Written Representations Regulations now provide for both:
- Part 1 – the expedited Written Representations procedure; and
- Part 2 – the fuller Written Representations procedure.
Certain appeals will continue to follow Part 2, while the Planning Inspectorate may also determine that an otherwise eligible Part 1 appeal should be transferred to another procedure where the circumstances of the case require it.
For example, the current guidance identifies that appeals involving more complex issues may need to follow a different route. Appeals against non-determination also fall outside the general Part 1 approach because there is no completed LPA decision and associated reasons for refusal forming the same evidential foundation. Similarly, some appeal types, including listed building consent appeals, continue outside the standard Part 1 route.
Transitional arrangements: which applications are affected?
The date that matters is the date the planning application was submitted, rather than simply the date on which the appeal is lodged. The new arrangements generally apply to relevant section 78(1) appeals relating to applications submitted on or after 1 April 2026.
Applications submitted before that date continue to be dealt with under the previous procedural arrangements. This means that two appeals submitted at around the same time could potentially follow different procedures depending upon when the original planning application was made.
For anyone considering an appeal, checking the date of the original application is therefore an essential first step.
Need advice on a planning appeal?
If your planning application has been refused, or you are considering submitting an application that could involve complex planning issues, Planning House can help you assess the available options. Contact Us.
Related Content
If you’re preparing or responding to a planning appeal, getting expert advice early can significantly improve your chances of success. At Planning House, we help ensure your case is robust, policy-led, and credible, combining professional insight with the careful, responsible use of AI tools. Other blogs you may find useful in relation to understanding the issues surrounding development proposals are:
- The Dos and Don’ts of Appealing a Planning Refusal in England
- How the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Guides Development
- How to Make a Robust Planning Application
- How Planning Applications Are Decided: Understanding Material Considerations
- A Practical Guide to Material Planning Considerations
- Top 10 Tips when considering Appealing a Planning Refusal
- Know your options if your planning application is refused
