- Decision
- dismissed, 18 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: J Somers
- Authority
- Oxford (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6005792
- Application reference
- 25/02635/FUL
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- Dropped kerb to give vehicle access to a house driveway
- Site context
- inside settlement
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- No Framework version cited
- Determinative policies
- TCPA s65(5), s327A(2)
- Main issues
- validity of application
Summary
Dropped kerb for a driveway in Oxford. Dismissed without any consideration of the merits. The red line took in highway land, but Certificate A had been signed and no notice was served on the highway authority, so the application was invalid (DL ¶4-6). No Framework policy was applied.
What made the difference
The wrong ownership certificate. A corrected Certificate B could not be accepted at appeal because it would deprive the owner of notification (Wheatcroft) (DL ¶5).
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| TCPA s65 / DMPO art 13-14 ownership certificate | fail | Certificate A signed but red line included highway footway and kerb owned by the highway authority; late unsigned Certificate B not accepted under Wheatcroft; application invalid, merits not considered (DL 2-7) |
Key facts
- Red line boundary covered highway land; no notice served on the highway authority
- Appeal dismissed under s79(6) without any merits assessment
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.