- Details
Article 4 Directions – a helpful reminder
The Article 4 Direction in contention sought to remove the permitted development right under Class MA (change from Class E to Class C3 (dwellings) for sites within Brighton and Hove Council. The SofS modified the boundary of the Article 4 Direction on the grounds that the Direction did not take a “significantly targeted approach in the assessment of the wholly unacceptable adverse impacts of the permitted development right in each location”. The letter from the SofS was clear that any article 4 direction should apply to the “smallest geographical area possible”.
This decision is an example to local planning authorities as to the approach that the Secretary of State will take to Article 4 directions which seek to remove permitted development rights without proper justification and which do not comply with paragraph 53 of the NPPF. The government is committed to providing housing and meeting its housing delivery targets. The permitted development right under Class MA is a big part of delivering on that and as such the SofS will be sure to thoroughly examine Article 4 directions to ensure that where they are removing the permitted development right, it is justified and in line with the paragraph 53 of the NPPF.
LPAs thinking about making Article 4 directions should think carefully about how widely they draw the scope, the evidence that they use to justify the direction, and should carefully apply paragraph 53 of the NPPF. Sharpe Pritchard’s planning team have experience advising local authorities making Article 4 directions and would be happy to assist. Please do get in touch.
Emily Knowles is a Partner at Sharpe Pritchard LLP.
For further insight and resources on local government legal issues from Sharpe Pritchard, please visit the SharpeEdge page by clicking on the banner below.
This article is for general awareness only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this page was first published. If you would like further advice and assistance in relation to any issue raised in this article, please contact us by telephone or email
|
Click here to view our archived articles or search below.
|
|
ABOUT SHARPE PRITCHARD
We are a national firm of public law specialists, serving local authorities, other public sector organisations and registered social landlords, as well as commercial clients and the third sector. Our team advises on a wide range of public law matters, spanning electoral law, procurement, construction, infrastructure, data protection and information law, planning and dispute resolution, to name a few key specialisms. All public sector organisations have a route to instruct us through the various frameworks we are appointed to. To find out more about our services, please click here.
|
|
OUR RECENT ARTICLES
August 04, 2026
High Court Orders Government to Pay Costs Following Free Speech Union Judicial ReviewGeorge McLellan and Olly Dickie share an update on Sharpe Pritchard's successful representation of the Free Speech Union, with the court ordering the Education Secretary to pay the costs of a judicial review.
August 04, 2026
Case Update: Section 106 Mortgagee Exclusion Clauses: What Developers & LPAs Need to KnowRebecca Stewart considers the implications of the Court of Appeal's recent decision to dismiss Westminster City Council’s appeal in a dispute over whether a purchaser was bound to provide flats at affordable events. The case concerned 16 flats which had been secured as…
August 04, 2026
Beyond Potholes: What Does a Modern Highways Maintenance Contract Need to Achieve?Jane Crees sets out what local authorities need to know when it comes to their highways maintenance contracts. We have been thinking a lot recently about what local authorities need from their highways maintenance contracts, particularly after working with several authorities on…
August 04, 2026
Court of Appeal Dismisses Westminster’s Appeal in Section 106 Affordable Housing CaseRebecca Stewart and Rachel Lee explain what you need to know about mortgagee exclusion clauses in section 106 agreements, in light of a recent Court of Appeal decision. The Court of Appeal has dismissed Westminster City Council’s appeal in Westminster City Council v GEMS House…
|
|
OUR KEY LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTACTS
|
||
|
Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
Rachel Murray-Smith Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Jo Pickering Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Emyr Thomas Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Gemma Duncan Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Simon Kiely Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||





Catherine Newman




