
ANNEXE APPEAL, CORNWALL
●WINNING AT PLANNING APPEAL
When aiming for a successful outcome at planning appeal, having a specialist from ANX on your side can make all the difference. Navigating the paperwork and representing yourself can feel overwhelming, especially if you’re unfamiliar with the complexities of annexe planning. This is especially critical when seeking permission to build a granny annexe for an elderly family member with declining health.

WHY WAS THE APPEAL NECESSARY?
After Cornwall Local Planning Authority (LPA) conducted a site visit during the initial planning application, they expressed concerns that the proposed annexe location was outside the curtilage of the main dwelling. Additionally, the LPA was apprehensive that, due to the distance from the main house and the extensive facilities within the annexe, it would function more as an independent dwelling rather than as ancillary accommodation.
Despite presenting strong counterarguments and case law supporting our position throughout the planning application process, the Council remained unwilling to approve the annexe in its proposed location. As a result, the application was refused, which was disappointing for both our client and our planning team.
Following a thorough review of the refusal and considering the LPA’s fundamental objections, we advised our client that lodging an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate would be the best course of action to pursue the case further.
● BRIEF
ANX crafted a detailed appeal statement, which was included with the appeal submission. This document specifically addressed the two main reasons for the planning permission denial:
●ANCILLARY

The LPA argued that the proposal couldn’t be considered ancillary to the main house because of the annexe’s size and extensive facilities. In response, ANX provided a detailed comparison highlighting the differences between a full dwelling and an annexe used for ancillary purposes. This analysis showed that, while the annexe was self-contained, it remained closely dependent on the main property, demonstrating a clear functional connection.
Additionally, referencing the case Uttlesford District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment & White [1992], NAPC demonstrated that, even though the annexe could potentially function independently, this did not imply it would.
●CURTILAGE

At the outset of the appeal, it was crucial to clarify that the garden annexe’s position within or outside the curtilage was irrelevant. This would only be a factor if Permitted Development Rights were being used, which was not the case here.
Our clients intended to construct a granny annexe for ancillary use, which would not qualify for Permitted Development Rights anyway.
The key consideration was whether the proposed location fell within the existing residential planning unit.
ANX provided an in-depth analysis of the Landmark case, Burdle v. Secretary of State for the Environment, applying its three planning unit tests to demonstrate the proposal’s compliance.