Suffolk Coastal District Council v Hopkins Homes Ltd and another [2017] UKSC 37
Suffolk Coastal is the Supreme Court authority on the former NPPF paragraph 49 and the meaning of policies for the supply of housing. It also contains important guidance on the relationship between national policy, out-of-date policies and the statutory development plan.
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
- [2017] UKSC 37; [2017] 1 WLR 1865; [2017] PTSR 623
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
- Judgment date
- 10th May 2017
- Judge
- Lord Neuberger, Lord Clarke, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge and Lord Gill
- Case number
- UKSC 2016/0076 and UKSC 2016/0078
Housing-supply policies had a focused meaning
The Supreme Court rejected an interpretation under which every policy capable of restricting housing development became a policy for the supply of housing. The expression was directed more narrowly to policies whose purpose was to provide or manage housing supply.
Out-of-date does not mean irrelevant
A policy being treated as out-of-date under national policy did not remove it from the development plan or make it legally irrelevant. Its weight remained a matter for the decision-maker in the planning balance, subject to the statutory duty and the relevant national policy.
The statutory development plan remains central
The judgment emphasised that the NPPF is policy rather than statute. The starting point remains the statutory development-plan duty. National policy guides the planning judgment but does not rewrite section 38(6).
Read the judgment
The official Supreme Court case page contains the judgment and press summary: Suffolk Coastal District Council v Hopkins Homes Ltd.
Planning Geek also holds the full judgment in the protected case law library. Gold Members can open it below.
Suffolk Coastal Case Law Page Updated: 11th September 2026