Estimated reading time: 6 minutes
Key Takeaways
- Horsham District Council has launched a *judicial review* challenging the Secretary of State’s approval of an 800-home scheme in Southwater.
- The council is partnering with Active Travel England to argue the decision ignored sustainable transport needs.
- Alleged misinterpretations of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and dismissal of the Southwater Neighbourhood Plan sit at the heart of the case.
- A successful challenge could halt or reshape the 800-home project and strengthen neighbourhood plans across Horsham.
- The outcome may set new precedents for balancing housing growth with active travel and local sustainability goals.
Table of Contents
Background of the Planning Decision
In July 2025 the Secretary of State granted outline permission for an 800-home development on the former Horsham Golf Club site in Southwater. This followed a developer’s appeal after Horsham District Council had rejected the proposal, citing poor active travel links and site unsuitability. The Planning Inspectorate backed the developer, and the Secretary of State signed off the scheme, declaring it “consistent with national policy.”
Yet many residents felt blindsided. As one parish councillor put it, *“Local voices risk being drowned out by central directives when neighbourhood plans are brushed aside.”*
Why the Council is Heading to Court
On discovering what it believes are “significant legal errors,” Horsham District Council instructed lawyers to pursue a judicial review. Working alongside Active Travel England, the authority claims:
- Misapplication of the NPPF: the Inspectorate allegedly downplayed policies on sustainable location and transport.
- Southwater Neighbourhood Plan deemed “out of date” without due justification, weakening local democratic input.
- Insufficient active travel provision: proposed routes for walking and cycling were, in the council’s words, *“tokenistic at best.”*
The full grounds are set out in court papers and recent coverage by Local Government Lawyer.
What’s at Stake for Southwater & Horsham
If the council wins, the permission could be quashed, forcing a fresh decision and possibly a redesign that bakes in stronger sustainability measures. Beyond this single site, success may give Horsham and other councils firmer ground to defend neighbourhood plans against large speculative schemes. Conversely, a defeat could embolden developers and signal that local plans carry limited weight when housing targets loom.
Possible Court Outcomes
Judicial reviews do not replace the original decision; they examine its legality. The High Court could therefore:
- Quash the permission – sending the case back for redetermination.
- Dismiss the challenge – leaving the 800 homes on track.
- Offer clarification on the status of neighbourhood plans and active travel policies, shaping future appeals nationwide.
Looking Ahead: Policy Ramifications
Whatever the verdict, Horsham’s legal gamble highlights a growing tension between rapid house-building targets and local sustainability ambitions. Planning experts suggest we may soon see:
- More rigorous demonstrations of compliance with the NPPF’s sustainable transport tests.
- Greater scrutiny of how developments align with *active travel* strategies championed by Active Travel England.
- Renewed emphasis on neighbourhood plans as *evidence* of community preference.
Conclusion
Horsham District Council’s courtroom stance is more than a local spat. It is a test case for how firmly national housing policy must bow to local sustainability goals. The judgment—expected later this year—will steer not only the future of 800 homes in Southwater but also the balance of power between Whitehall, town hall and the cyclists and walkers who want safe, green routes stitched into new communities.
FAQ
Why is Horsham District Council challenging the decision?
The council contends that the Planning Inspectorate and Secretary of State misapplied national policy, ignored active travel requirements and unfairly labelled the Southwater Neighbourhood Plan “out of date.”
What is a judicial review?
A judicial review lets the High Court examine whether a public-body decision was lawful. It does not re-decide the merits but can quash a decision if legal errors are proven.
Could the 800-home development still go ahead?
Yes. If the court upholds the original permission the project can proceed largely unchanged. A quashing order, however, would require a fresh determination and potentially new conditions or even refusal.
How long will the judicial review take?
Most planning judicial reviews are heard within six to nine months of being filed, though complex cases can take longer if appeals follow.
Where can I read more about the case?
Detailed reporting is available via Local Government Lawyer, which tracks planning litigation across the country.