• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Global
  • Global Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation

R (on the application of McLennan) v. Medway Council

Filing Date: 2019
Reporter Info: [2019] EWHC 1738 (Admin)
Status: Decided
Case Categories:
  • Suits against governments
    • Environmental assessment and permitting
      • Renewable projects
Jurisdictions:
  • United Kingdom
    • England and Wales
      • High Court of Justice
Principal Laws:
  • United Kingdom
    • Town and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
  • United Kingdom
    • Planning Act 2008
  • United Kingdom
    • Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (England and Wales)
Summary:

A British court ruled that a local planning board had erred in granting a development permit without considering whether the proposed project would affect the neighbor's ability to generate electricity from his solar panels.

In October 2017, the claimant received permission to install solar panels on the south-facing wall of his residential property in Rochester, Kent. In September 2018, the claimant's next-door neighbor, whose detached residence lies immediately to the south of the claimant's house, applied to the Medway Council for planning permission for the construction of a dormer. The claimant objected on the ground that the proposed development would block the sun, and adversely affect his ability to generate electricity from his solar panels. The planning board granted permission in December 2018.

After the claimant challenged the permit, the Court concluded that the planning board incorrectly decided that the claimant's concerns about the development's effect on his solar system were immaterial. The Court reasoned that both the Medway Local Plan and the British National Planning Policy Framework recognize the positive contribution of even small-scale renewable energy schemes to addressing climate change. The Court further held that the planning board erred in deciding that the claimant's objection was purely a matter of private interest -- as opposed to public interest -- given the role of solar energy in reducing greenhouse gases. The Court accordingly quashed the permit.

At Issue: Whether planning board erred in failing to consider that proposed development would infringe on neighbor's use of solar panels.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Summary
07/10/2019 Judgment Download No summary available.

© 2023 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.