Property developer Gladman has successfully appealed against Inverclyde Council's rejection of its plans for 88 homes near Kilmacolm after a controversial court ruling.
Lawyers say the case, in which the Court of Session ruled the law of Tilted Balance applies in Scotland could prove to be a landmark for NIMBY cases north of the border.
Local groups had mounted a campaign against the firm's proposals for green belt land at North Denniston which generated 600 letters of objection.
Gladman had previously had plans rejected for around 100 homes in North Denniston and at Quarrier's Village.
The firm appealed to the Scottish Government Reporter over its latest plans which were again refused last month.
Kilmacolm Civic Trust had argued the development would ruin views from the village and accused Gladman of being "utterly insensitive towards anything to do with the ambience of the village environment".
But on Wednesday 3 June, the Court of Session judged in the case of Gladman Developments Limited v Scottish Ministers that ‘tilted balance’ applied in cases where there is a shortfall supply of land for housing.
Burges Salmon’s Scottish Planning and Compulsory Purchase team successfully argued that in 2014, Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) had introduced a presumption in favour of development which contributes towards sustainable development and is a significant consideration when a local authority has a shortfall in its five-year effective housing land supply.
In England, this has been known as a ‘tilted balance’ in favour of planning permission but there had been debate around whether it applied in Scotland.
Burges Salmon partner Craig Whelton and associate Lynsey Reid led the case for Gladman.
Whelton said: “We’re pleased to have supported Gladman with its successful appeal in this landmark case. The Court’s judgement, and quashing of the appeal, should put planning decision-makers on notice as to the weight to be attached to SPP, and the proper application of the Presumption and the tilted balance.”
