Marks & Spencer has won a legal challenge against the Government, after Michael Gove denied planning permission for the redevelopment of the retailer’s main store on Oxford Street in London
Levelling up secretary Michael Gove refused planning permission for M&S’s plans to redevelop the Oxford Street site, near the March Arch in the West End in the summer of last year.
Campaigners against the redevelopment were concerned about the carbon footprint of the new site and Michael Gove said that the building should be refurbished rather than demolished. Demolition risked impacting nearby heritage assets, he added, such as the Grade II* listed Selfridges store directly opposite M&S.
However shortly after, M&S began their legal challenge against the ruling, in which high court judge Mrs Justice Lieven ruled that Gove had misapplied planning policy, as well as dismissing concerns about the heritage of the existing art-deco building Orchard House on the site.
Mrs Justice Lieven went on to say that “in my view, it is plain that the secretary of state misinterpreted the national planning policy framework, and therefore erred in law.
“The secretary of state relied on a meaning of the national planning policy framework which is simply not open to him.”
M&S were pleased with the outcome of their legal challenge
M&S operations director, Sacha Berendji said on the verdict: “Today’s judgment couldn’t be clearer, the Court has agreed with our arguments on five out of the six counts we brought forward and ruled that the secretary of state’s decision to block the redevelopment of our Marble Arch store was unlawful.
“The result has been a long, unnecessary and costly delay to the only retail-led regeneration on Oxford Street which would deliver one of London’s greenest buildings, create thousands of new jobs and rejuvenate the capital’s premier shopping district.
“The Secretary of State now has the power to unlock the wide-ranging benefits of this significant investment and send a clear message to UK and global business that the government supports sustainable growth and the regeneration of our towns and cities.”
“Embarassing for the Government”
James Souter, partner at Charles Russell Speechlys said: “This case goes to the heart of an uneasy tension between the protection of heritage assets, environmental concerns and developmental potential.
“Today’s decision will be embarrassing for the Government, not least because of the public perception on the costs incurred. It could also give developers greater confidence in bringing forwards contemporary new-build schemes, even where the possibility of retrofitting existing structures is theoretically possible.
“However, this does not automatically mean that planning permission will be granted – Gove will have to redetermine the appeal and could in theory still refuse planning permission”.
The National Federation of Demoltion Contractors (NFDC) commented that they were “glad to see today’s High Court ruling, though it is unfortunate that the operations of a prime site in one of the UK’s flagship retail districts has been disrupted, delaying its much-welcomed carbon footprint improvements.
“We applaud the team at M&S and everyone involved in the project for championing a sensible mindset to sustainable redevelopment, which considers the entire life cycle of the site, rather than applying a “one-size-fits-all” approach.”
