AC-2025-LON-000036 - [2025] EWHC 2701 (Admin)

Ground 5 contains a bare assertion that permission was not required for the removal of the hedgerow. The Council accepted that the removal of the hedgerow did not amount to a breach of planning control and the Inspector removed the allegation from the Enforcement Notice. The removal of the hedgerow required permission under the Hedgerow Regulations and the Inspector properly dealt with the loss of biodiversity with the unnecessary removal of 45 metres of the biodiverse hedgerow. The hedgerow was not the only loss, and the Inspector was also concerned about the loss of bramble scrub.

The material conclusion with respect to biodiversity was that both parties agreed that there would be significant biodiversity net loss: the Appellant asserted a loss of 39.4% and the Council asserted a loss 68.3%. The Applicant did not put forward any basis upon which the agreed loss of biodiversity could be compensated.

The loss of biodiversity is contrary to policy. Ground 5 is not arguable.