Planning conditions – what are they?

 

Congratulations! You obtained planning – but wait…. the nasty planning officer has imposed some conditions on the planning approval – how dare they!!

This article will help explain what they are, what you need to do and what you can do if you do not like them. A lawful development certificate is different: it is a certificate confirming lawfulness, not a planning permission carrying planning conditions.

Please remember Planning Geek can help you. Get in touch today.

 

Should be kept to a minimum

 

Any conditions should be relevant to the permission that has been granted.

DM6 of the August 2026 National Planning Policy Framework says planning conditions should only be attached where they are:

1. Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms
2. Relevant to the development and to planning considerations generally
3. Sufficiently precise to be capable of compliance and enforcement
4. Reasonable in all other respects

DM6 groups the familiar condition tests into these four requirements. Each condition must satisfy them all.

DM6 also says planning conditions should not be used to restrict national permitted development rights unless there is clear justification. A September 2026 Slough appeal is a useful example. The Inspector deleted a condition preventing subdivision or HMO use and another removing Part 1 Classes B and E because the council had not justified those restrictions adequately on the particular site. The related costs decision is also instructive: costs were awarded for the unjustified HMO restriction and Class B restriction, but not for Class E, where the council had a recognisable site-specific planning reason even though it ultimately lost on the merits. See our Slough permitted development rights appeal report.

It also says that conditions should not be used to require payments of money or the formal transfer of land to another party. Where a national model condition is relevant it should be used unless there is a strong reason to use different wording, and a condition requiring discharge before development starts should be avoided unless there is clear justification.

 

The legal limits on planning conditions

 

Those policy requirements sit on top of long-established case law. In Newbury District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment [1981] AC 578, the House of Lords confirmed that a planning condition must be imposed for a planning purpose, must fairly and reasonably relate to the development being permitted, and must not be so unreasonable that no reasonable planning authority could have imposed it.

That remains an important limit on what a council can try to achieve through a condition. A condition cannot be used simply because the outcome would be convenient or desirable. It has to be something the planning legislation actually allows the authority to secure in connection with the development.

The Supreme Court revisited that boundary in DB Symmetry Ltd v Swindon Borough Council [2022] UKSC 33. The Court held that a planning condition could not lawfully require a landowner to dedicate land as public highway. There are other legal mechanisms for securing that result, including a planning obligation where appropriate. Importantly, the Court then interpreted the actual condition before it as requiring construction of the roads, not dedication to the public.

The older Court of Appeal decision in Hall & Co Ltd v Shoreham-by-Sea Urban District Council [1964] 1 WLR 240 is part of the same line of authority. Planning conditions cannot be used to compel an applicant to surrender land or private rights without compensation where the planning legislation does not authorise that result. DB Symmetry approved that principle in the modern statutory context.

So when reading a condition, there are really two questions: what does the wording actually require, and is that requirement within the lawful scope of a planning condition?

 

How should a planning condition be interpreted?

 

Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2015] UKSC 74 gives the modern approach to construing conditions in public planning documents. The question is what a reasonable reader would understand the words to mean when the condition is read in the context of the permission or consent as a whole. Natural meaning, purpose, related conditions and common sense all matter.

The Supreme Court also rejected an absolute rule that words can never be implied into a planning condition. But implication is different from interpretation, and the court stressed the need for great restraint, particularly where breach of the public document may carry criminal consequences. The practical starting point is therefore always the words actually used, read objectively in their proper planning context.

 

What is a Grampian condition?

 

A Grampian condition is a negative condition which prevents development, occupation or another stage of a scheme until specified action has happened elsewhere. The name comes from Grampian Regional Council v City of Aberdeen District Council (1984) 47 P&CR 633. The House of Lords accepted that a condition could lawfully stop development until an off-site road had been closed, even though the applicant could not itself guarantee that the separate statutory road-closure process would succeed.

A useful prior-approval example is R (LW Zenith Ltd) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2022] EWHC 3317 (Admin). The High Court held that an obvious solution was a negative condition preventing occupation until separately permitted window works had been carried out. That approach has now been applied in the Dursley Class MA appeal, where the Inspector imposed an occupation condition tied to an extant permission for windows and rooflights.

The distinction is between trying to order somebody to do something beyond the applicant’s control and imposing an enforceable restriction on the development itself until the necessary event occurs. British Railways Board v Secretary of State for the Environment [1993] 3 PLR 125; [1994] JPL 32 then confirmed that a Grampian-type condition is not automatically unlawful simply because the prospects of satisfying it are poor. The likelihood of fulfilment can still matter to the planning judgment and to whether imposing the condition is sensible and reasonable, but lack of control does not by itself remove the legal power to use a properly framed negative condition.

 

Can the description of development make a permission temporary?

 

I’m Your Man Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment (1999) 77 P&CR 251 is a useful trap. An Inspector had granted permission for a use described as being “for a temporary period of seven years”, but no condition required the use to stop after seven years. The High Court held that, under a planning permission granted on an application, the temporal restriction had to be imposed by condition. The wording in the description did not by itself create an enforceable seven-year limit, so the permission was permanent in effect.

Do not take that as saying the description of development is irrelevant. The description still defines what development has actually been authorised, and a materially different development is not brought within the permission simply because there is no condition about it. The narrower lesson from I’m Your Man is that where a council intends a permission to be temporary, personal or otherwise subject to a continuing restriction, that restriction should be expressed clearly as a planning condition rather than left to descriptive wording alone.

The Planning Advisory Services sums these up well, so we will not repeat them here. This page will open in a new tab.

 

Different forms of conditions

 

As a general rule these will be broken down into the following..

• General Conditions that must be met in order to complete the build
• Pre-commencement Conditions
• Conditions during construction
• Pre-occupation Conditions
• Conditions on using the building
• Conditions on how you can alter the building
• Conditions after occupation for monitoring and management

There may be a few others, but the vast majority will fit into one of the above. Not all of these will apply to every decision. Planning permissions and associated consents can carry conditions where the relevant legislation allows them; a lawful development certificate is different because it confirms a lawful position rather than granting planning permission.

It is important that you read each condition carefully.

Once you have identified how each condition affects the build or conversions etc., make a start on any pre-commencement conditions.

 

Are planning conditions enforceable after the decision notice?

 

Yes. Once planning permission has been granted, its conditions form part of the permission. Under section 171A(1)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, failing to comply with a condition or limitation subject to which planning permission was granted is a breach of planning control.

Where enforcement is expedient, the local planning authority can use an enforcement notice or, specifically for a breach of condition, a breach of condition notice under section 187A. There is no appeal to the Secretary of State against a breach of condition notice. Failure to comply with it after the compliance period is a criminal offence and can lead to an unlimited fine. See our guide to planning enforcement notices.

A condition can also require continuing compliance after construction or occupation, so it does not simply disappear when the building work finishes. Whether a particular condition can lawfully be enforced still depends on its wording and validity: conditions must be sufficiently precise and enforceable in the first place.

Failure to lawfully begin the development by the deadline in the decision notice can mean that the planning permission lapses. Pre-commencement conditions need careful reading: breach of some conditions can prevent the works from amounting to a lawful commencement, but that is not automatic for every condition.

 

Pre-commencement conditions

 

A pre-commencement condition is one which must be complied with:

• before any building or operation which is part of the development has started
• where the development consists of a material change of use of any buildings or other land, before the change of use begins

Where the statutory pre-commencement condition procedure applies, the local planning authority must notify the applicant in advance and normally allow 10 working days for a substantive response, explaining why the condition is needed. If you do not respond with a substantive reply, the LPA may go ahead and impose these pre-commencement conditions without your consent. We have in the past got the LPA to avoid certain pre-commencement conditions until after a demolition,as it would make the required report hard to obtain. Note that if you do not agree, the LPA may refuse the application. This is why having a good planning consultant is key.

It is important that you read each condition carefully, especially pre-commencement conditions. A condition which clearly prohibits development from starting until a requirement has been met can be critical to making the planning permission extant. But the courts do not treat every condition mentioning something before commencement as automatically fatal. R (Hart Aggregates Ltd) v Hartlepool Borough Council [2005] EWHC 840 (Admin) and Greyfort Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 908 distinguish conditions which expressly prohibit commencement and go to the heart of the permission from other condition breaches. The wording of the individual condition matters.

However you may only need to do part of any pre-commencement conditions. For example it might say that a Construction Management Plan must be submitted and approved by the local authority before development starts. But it may also say that samples of the roof tiles must be submitted to the local authority before development starts. The big difference is that on the second condition, you can make a material start once submitted. You do not need to wait for approval. Reading them all is key.

A variation on pre-commencement might be that these are split into pre-development and pre-construction. Pre-construction might allow for demolition to take place, but pre-development would prevent anything from happening until conditions are met.

Pre-commencement conditions should be dealt with promptly and within 8 weeks. A fee is payable for these. If the conditions have not been discharged within 12 weeks, the local authority must return the fee (not applicable to prior approval or reserved matters). The fee is per application for discharge rather than per condition. Multiple conditions can be dealt with together.

 

Discharging conditions

 

if you have any conditions which require information to be sent to the LPA and maybe agreed by them, you will need to discharge these conditions. This can take a number of weeks. So the earlier you do this the better. At this time, you might want to think about CIL (if it hasn’t already been dealt with) and building regs.

It is the responsibility of the applicant to discharge any conditions. Although Planning Geek can of course help.

You need to allow at least 8 weeks for the process – that is the statutory period. But in reality I would allow at least 12 or 16 if possible. The longer the better. In fact I would recommend actioning as soon as the planning is granted.

A fee is payable, and it is lower for a condition on a householder permission than for anything else. Usefully it is charged per request rather than per condition, so several conditions submitted together cost the same as one – see our guide to planning fees for the current figures.

For the full process – the eight week rule, deemed discharge where the council goes silent, and the pre-commencement trap that can stop works from lawfully implementing the permission – see our guide to discharge of conditions.

 

Can a planning condition require a management plan?

 

Yes, where a management plan is genuinely needed to make the development acceptable and the condition satisfies the normal tests above. The plan turns broad promises about how a use will operate into requirements which can be checked and, if necessary, enforced.

Depending on the development, a management plan might deal with arrivals and departures, parking, refuse, deliveries, use of outdoor areas, hours, staff supervision, guest behaviour, noise, complaints and who is responsible for responding when something goes wrong.

The condition needs to be clear about what must be submitted or approved, when the plan takes effect, whether the development must operate in accordance with it and how later amendments can be made. A vague promise to operate responsibly is very different from an approved document secured by condition.

The High Court considered a detailed noise management plan in Timothy Bent v Cambridgeshire County Council and Wicken Lime and Stone Company Limited t/a Frances Flower (Eastern) [2017] EWHC 1366 (Admin). The plan covered practical matters including haul-road maintenance, equipment siting, reversing alarms, staff training, noise controls and a complaints procedure. For more on that case and acoustic evidence generally, see our guide to noise in planning applications.

 

Can a condition use technical measurements?

 

Yes. A planning condition does not become invalid simply because an ordinary reader needs specialist knowledge to apply it.

In R (Greaves) v Boston Borough Council [2014] EWHC 3950 (Admin), the court considered a wind-turbine noise condition expressed using technical acoustic measurements. Dove J explained that noise conditions will often be read and applied by Environmental Health Officers or acousticians and may legitimately require professional judgment.

Bent followed that approach when rejecting a challenge to a condition referring to BS4142. The court stressed that uncertainty should not be confused with something which simply requires technical expert judgment. A condition can still fail if it is so vague that it has no sensible or ascertainable meaning, but it does not have to spell out every measurement or methodology.

 

Removing a condition that you do not agree with!

 

If you wish to remove a condition you have two choices. One you can appeal to the inspectorate to have it removed. This must be within 12 weeks for a householder application or 6 months otherwise. However, and this is important, the entire application will be considered by the inspectorate. This might mean new conditions or even a refusal of the application. Although this is rare.

Your other option is to apply for a Section 73 to have that pesky condition removed or altered. If that is granted then you will get a new planning decision notice. There is no general time limit for making a section 73 application while the permission remains capable of being varied. If this is refused you can then apply to the inspectorate on this refusal. Note that neighbours are usually re-consulted as part of the process.

Bear in mind that a Section 73 only deals with the planning permission. If the building is listed, the conditions on the listed building consent are a separate matter, varied or discharged under Section 19 instead – see our guide to varying listed building consent conditions. A change to the design may well need both.

As you can see a S73 might be easier, especially as the initial wait for an appeal can be weeks if not months. More details on appeals can be found here.

You can find out more about a Section 73 here.

 

What if the local authority doesn’t respond?

 

If the council does not determine an application to discharge a condition within the statutory period, you may have more than one route. For qualifying conditions, the deemed discharge procedure can sometimes bring the condition to an end without an express council decision. An appeal against non-determination may also be available. The exclusions and notice mechanics matter, so see our detailed guide to discharge of conditions before taking action.

If timing is critical, Planning Geek can help review the wording of the condition and the safest route.

 

 

 

Other Planning Application Sections

 

Planning Conditions Page Updated: 5th September 2026