Crystal Property (London) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2016] EWCA Civ 1265
Crystal Property is an important Court of Appeal decision on outline planning permission and reserved matters. The developer sought outline permission for shops and offices at Morris House in Hackney, with all matters reserved, including scale.
The argument was that the inspector had wrongly considered the height and massing of the proposed building when scale was supposed to be left for later approval. The Court of Appeal rejected that argument and dismissed the appeal.
The useful principle is that an outline application is not a blank cheque. Enough information must be provided for the authority or inspector to understand the development being proposed and decide whether it is acceptable in principle. Reserving scale does not prevent the decision-maker from considering whether the stated amount of development can realistically be accommodated on the site.
Important legal note: Planning Geek is a planning consultancy, not a law firm. This page provides general planning information and is not legal advice. Case law must be read in its factual and legal context and may be affected by later judgments, legislation or policy. Where the original judgment is available, it remains the authoritative source. If the outcome matters to a live case or dispute, take advice from an appropriately qualified planning solicitor or barrister.
Copyright and licensing: Crown copyright and other rights in judgments and source material remain with the relevant rights holders. Where a judgment is reproduced from Find Case Law, it is used under the Open Justice Licence and the source should be acknowledged. Material obtained from other sources is reproduced only where the applicable terms permit it. Planning Geek does not claim copyright in the text of court judgments.
- Neutral citation
- [2016] EWCA Civ 1265
- Court
- Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
- Judgment date
- 9th December 2016
- Judge
- Tomlinson LJ and Lindblom LJ
- Case number
- C1/2015/0448
Need help with a planning application?
Planning Geek isn’t just a reference site - preparing and submitting planning applications is what we do. If you’d like a hand with an application, an appeal or any other planning matter, we’d be glad to help.
An outline proposal beside the Rio Cinema
Crystal Property sought outline permission for a mixed retail and office development at Morris House, adjoining 130 Kingsland High Street in Hackney. The site was close to the Grade II listed Rio Cinema.
The application reserved all of the recognised reserved matters for later approval. It nevertheless stated the amount of floorspace proposed and was accompanied by drawings showing a part four-storey, part five-storey building.
Hackney refused permission, including because of the proposed height and massing and the effect on the street scene and the setting of the Rio Cinema. The inspector dismissed the developer’s appeal.
Outline permission still needs a defined proposal
The Court of Appeal went back to the basic purpose of outline permission. It allows the principle of development to be decided while specified details are left for later approval, but the first-stage permission must still define enough of the proposal for a proper planning judgement to be made.
Lindblom LJ referred to the long-standing warning that an outline permission should not amount to a blank cheque. The decision-maker needs sufficient information about the character, approximate size, use and amount of development to know what is being approved in principle.
That remains important when an application form says that every reserved matter is reserved. The label does not remove the need to describe the development itself.
Scale and floorspace are not the same thing
For reserved-matters purposes, scale concerns the height, width and length of each building in relation to its surroundings. The amount of development, such as the floorspace proposed for each use, is a different concept.
Crystal Property had specified the amount of development it wanted. The inspector was entitled to consider whether that quantum could be accommodated acceptably on the site, even though the final dimensions and appearance of the building would have remained for reserved matters if outline permission had been granted.
The decision therefore does not collapse the distinction between outline permission and reserved matters. It confirms that the amount of development can be fixed or described at outline stage while the detailed scale remains reserved.
Illustrative drawings can still inform the decision
Drawings submitted with an outline application do not automatically become approved details. Where details are genuinely stated to be illustrative, they can remain illustrative.
But that does not make them irrelevant. An authority or inspector may use illustrative material to understand how the stated amount of development might sit on the site and whether the principle and quantum of development are realistic.
The Court of Appeal concluded that the inspector had not unlawfully determined the reserved matter of scale in advance. He had assessed the proposal put before him and used the available material to decide whether the outline development was acceptable.
Why Crystal Property matters when making an outline application
The practical lesson is to be precise about what is fixed and what is not. An outline application should identify the amount and nature of the development clearly, and any plans intended only to illustrate one possible design should say so.
Equally, reserving scale should not be treated as a way to avoid questions about whether the proposed quantum of development can fit the site without unacceptable effects. Those questions may have to be answered at outline stage because they go to the acceptability of the development in principle.
Read the Crystal Property judgment
Gold Members can read the complete Court of Appeal judgment in the protected Planning Geek case law library.
Crystal Property Case Law Page Updated: 22nd September 2026