Court of Appeal grants local resident permission to intervene in airfield asylum planning appeal

Braintree decided to Mr Justice Waksman's ruling in late April and received permission for the appeal to be heard by the Court of Appeal last month (26 May).

Waksman J refused permission for Braintree's application for an injunction blocking the plans, finding that he did not have the jurisdiction to make an injunction.

The council's argument challenged the Home Office's use of Class Q permitted development rights, which allow the Home Office to move people onto the site without the need for planning permission.

However, in an obiter observation, the High Court judge noted that: "Even if I had jurisdiction to consider making an injunction, it would still have not arisen as I would have found that Class Q applies so there would be no breach of planning control on which an injunction could bite."

Gabriel Clarke-Holland, a Braintree resident, has been given permission to intervene in Braintree's planning appeal by way of written submissions.

West Lindsey District Council, which is challenging a Home Office plan to use another disused airfield in its area, has also been granted permission to intervene in the appeal.

The hearing is scheduled for 12 June.

Braintree, West Lindsey and Clarke-Holland have also brought separate judicial review challenges. All three judicial review applications will be considered together by a senior planning judge on 12 and 13 July 2023 to decide whether permission should be granted for the claims to continue to a full hearing.

Clarke-Holland is represented in the Court of Appeal proceedings by Sue Willman, Emily Soothill and Ahmed Ali from Deighton Pierce Glynn Solicitors instructing Alex Goodman KC and Charles Bishop from Landmark Chambers.

Adam Carey