Secretary of State for Transport v John Lewis Partnership Pensions Trust
Decision date: 20 February 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKUT 78 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerns a CAAD for land at Old Oak Common where Ealing certified a 722‑unit residential redevelopment; the Secretary of State challenged whether that scheme (or a lower‑height residential alternative or a commercial fallback) would have been an appropriate alternative in the "cancelled scheme world" at the 23 December 2017 valuation date. The Tribunal set out that it must apply the cancellation assumption, treat existing permissions, buildings completed by the valuation date and planning policies unconnected to the scheme as present in the hypothetical world, and decide whether a reasonable planning authority could have granted the CAAD scheme on ordinary planning grounds. The notes do not record the Tribunal’s final determination on whether the CAAD scheme (or alternatives) was appropriate.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
The binding ratio that can be identified from these notes is that in assessing a CAAD under the cancellation assumption the Tribunal must imagine the scheme cancelled but may properly treat existing planning permissions, buildings completed by the valuation (vesting) date, and planning policies that are not part of the scheme as existing in the cancelled scheme world; the Tribunal must then decide, using ordinary planning principles and the development plan as the starting point, whether a reasonable planning authority could have granted permission for the proposed alternative development.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The notes record obiter observations that planning policies influenced by a scheme can nonetheless survive into the cancelled scheme world if they have an independent function (illustrated by prior cases), and that post‑launch real‑world events should not be imported into the hypothetical cancelled scheme world (the Tribunal’s “Narnia” analogy). These points are presented as analytic guidance rather than dispositive holdings.