Why previous appeal decisions matter.
An appeal decision does not only settle one case. It can be a material consideration in later applications and appeals, on the same site and elsewhere. Councils and inspectors must take relevant decisions into account.
What a material consideration is
Planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise (section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990). A material consideration is any matter relevant to the use and development of land. National policy, the planning history of a site and earlier appeal decisions can all be material considerations.
Like cases should be decided alike
The courts have long held that consistency matters in planning. In North Wiltshire District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment (1993) 65 P&CR 137, the Court of Appeal held that a previous appeal decision is capable of being a material consideration, because like cases should be decided in a like manner. A decision-maker does not have to follow an earlier decision, but if they disagree with it on a point that matters, they must take it into account and give reasons for reaching a different view.
In DLA Delivery Ltd v Baroness Cumberlege of Newick [2018] EWCA Civ 1305 the Court of Appeal upheld the quashing of a decision that had not taken into account an earlier, relevant appeal decision. Inconsistent decisions without explanation are open to challenge.
How much weight an earlier decision carries
Weight depends on how similar the cases are. Earlier decisions tend to carry most weight when they involve:
- the same site: a dismissed appeal shows what needs to change; an allowed appeal can establish the principle of development or a fallback position;
- the same issue in the same area, such as the council’s housing land supply, the character of a conservation area or the capacity of a road;
- the same policy: how an inspector interpreted a local plan policy or a paragraph of national policy;
- a recent decision made under the same policy framework.
They carry less weight where the policy has changed since, the site context is different, or the evidence before the inspector was different. Each case turns on its own facts and planning merits.
More important since April 2026
For applications made on or after 1 April 2026, most appeals are decided on the evidence the council had, and new material is not normally accepted. One of the limited exceptions is a relevant decision on another case. Researching comparable appeals before submitting an application, and relying on them in the application itself, is now part of making a good application. What changed in 2026.
Using comparable appeals well
Search for the issue, not just the proposal
A side extension in a conservation area raises the same heritage questions as a dormer. Search for the issue that decided the council’s refusal.
Read both outcomes
Allowed appeals show what inspectors accepted; dismissed appeals show where the line was drawn. A balanced set is more persuasive than a selection that only supports your case.
Explain the similarities and differences
State what matches (policy, context, scale, harm) and what differs, and why the difference does or does not matter.
Check the decision still stands
Check whether the decision was challenged in the courts, quashed or redetermined, and whether the policy it applied has changed.
Find comparable decisions
Search the full text of appeal decisions by issue, phrase, council or inspector, and collect the relevant ones into a report.
Search decisions →General information, not legal advice.