Inspectors overturned 14 of 28 Warwick District Council refusals since April. Its major-appeal rate is at the 10% special measures line, its own report says.
Planning inspectors have overturned half of Warwick District Council’s planning decisions that went to appeal since April. The council’s own figures show 14 of 28 appeal decisions went against it between 1 April and 11 October 2026.
The figure is in the appeals report that went to the planning committee on Wednesday 14 October. The same report warns councillors about a second number: the share of major planning decisions that end up lost on appeal. For the current two-year period it stands at exactly 10%.
The report says a council whose figure goes above 10% is “at risk of being taken into Special Measures”. It tells councillors and officers to “remain alert to the risk of Special Measures potentially arising from refusals of planning permission which are not fully justified on planning grounds”.
The figures
The council’s October appeals report gives two measures.
All appeals, 1 April to 11 October 2026:
- 28 appeal decisions
- 14 allowed against the council’s decision, which is 50%
The September report, to 14 September, had 14 of 26, or 54%. The two decisions that came in between both went the council’s way.
Major applications, which the government uses to judge the quality of a council’s decisions. These are schemes such as ten or more homes. The measure is the number of major appeals lost as a share of all major decisions the council made.
| Period | Major decisions | Refused | Appeals allowed or lost | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| April 2024 to March 2026 | 62 | 10 | 6 (4 allowed, 2 for non-determination) | 9.6% |
| April 2025 to March 2027, so far | 40 | not stated | 4, with 3 dismissed and 1 still to be decided | 10% |
The report says the first period is understood to be the next one the government will review. For the second, eight of the 40 major decisions are subject to appeal.
The arithmetic is tight. With 40 major decisions so far in the current period, one more major appeal lost would take the figure to 12.5%, unless the council makes more major decisions in the meantime. That calculation is ours, from the council’s figures.
The Hatton appeal that went the council’s way
In September the council’s report said one major appeal in the earlier period was still being considered, and that its outcome “may increase that proportion over 10%”.
That appeal has since gone the council’s way. The October report says all nine appeals from that period are now decided, three of them dismissed, and the figure stays at 9.6%. The major appeal the October list shows as decided is land off Oakdene Crescent, Shrewley, near Hatton station: a hearing on 20 August, and the result “Appeal Dismissed”.
The inspector’s decision letter, dated 23 September 2026, dismissed the appeal by Altus Homes and Morro Partnerships. They had wanted to build 28 homes on about 1.17 hectares beside the railway. The council refused the scheme, application W/24/0706, in September 2025. (The council’s appeals table describes it as 20 homes; the application and the decision letter both say 28.)
The inspector found:
- the site is in the Green Belt and the scheme was inappropriate development there
- Hatton Station has “a very limited range of facilities and services”, mainly a railway station, a yacht club and a nursery
- the nearest bus stops are about 1.1 kilometres away, served “only twice a week by a single return service between Leamington Spa and Henley-in-Arden”
The inspector also gave “very significant weight” to the homes. All 28 would have been affordable, three-quarters for social rent and a quarter shared ownership. The letter notes the district’s latest published housing land supply is 1.96 years, a shortfall of 3,466 homes. Even so, the benefits did not “clearly outweigh” the harm to the Green Belt.
Shrewley Parish Council’s chair and vice chair, and five residents, spoke at the hearing.
Why it matters this week
The appeals report went to the same committee that approved padel courts at Squab Hall Farm against officers’ advice the same night. We have that decision here. A grant cannot be appealed by the applicant, so it does not count against the measure. The report’s warning is about refusals.
The previous evening, councillors also granted listed building consent for vacuum glazing at 43 Brunswick Street against officers’ advice, as we reported in our 13 October results.
What it means for you
- If you object to a planning application, a refusal is not always the end. Half the appeals decided since April went the applicant’s way, and the inspector can grant permission the council refused.
- Appeals are public. Each one is listed in the council’s monthly appeals report, and the documents, including the inspector’s letter, appear on the application’s page on the planning portal. Our planning applications page explains how to find them.
- Special measures is the government’s designation of an underperforming planning authority. Its designation criteria set the line at 10% of decisions overturned at appeal, and say that where a council is designated, applicants for that category of development may apply directly to the Planning Inspectorate instead. Warwick District Council is not in that position: its figure is at the line, not over it.
Have your say