Skip to content

Brought to you by

Dentons logo in black and white

UK Planning Law Blog

Real opinions on the alphabet soup of planning and development from s106 agreements to CIL, PDR to DCO, BIDs to UBR, viability to profits for everyone

open menu close menu

UK Planning Law Blog

  • Planning TV
  • Who We Are

Has the High Court ended the ‘Housing with Care’ Use Class debate?

By Rachael Herbert
August 5, 2020
  • Affordable Housing
  • Extra Care
  • Planning Permission
  • Planning Policy
  • Viability
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn

The decision of Holgate J in Rectory Homes Limited v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government. Case Number: CO/4682/2019 helpfully highlights the point that the Use Class debate for ‘Housing with Care’ developments has in some circumstances become an unnecessary distraction and irrelevance (noted previously). Unless the development plan policy for affordable housing expressly refers to C2 or C3, whether a development properly falls within C2 or C3 is not determinative of whether or not affordable housing needs to be provided (the position is the same for CIL, as it too depends on the wording of the CIL charging schedule).

In this appeal all parties agreed that the 78 unit ‘Housing with Care’ scheme would fall within the C2 Use Class (even if each unit had its own front door and had between 1 to 4 bedrooms). However, the key question was whether or not the scheme was still required to provide 40% affordable housing because the 78 units were still “dwellings” even though they came with care.  The Defendant’s Inspector and Holgate J both concluded that they did and that there was a requirement to provide 40% affordable housing subject to viability.  It is worth noting that no viability arguments were made to justify why the developer, Rectory Homes Limited, was not seeking to provide 40% affordable housing in the event that the housing with care units were found to be “dwellings” to which policy CSH3 of the South Oxfordshire Core Strategy applied.

The key findings of Holgate J were:

  • “policy CSH3 does not use the word “dwelling” as a term restricted to the C3 Use Class. The policy makes no reference, expressly or by implication, to the Use Classes Order at all” (para 47)
  • “Where the units in an extra care scheme physically amount to dwellings, it really does not matter what alternative language a developer chooses to describe them. They still remain dwellings” (para 63)
  • “… there is no reason why a C2 development or scheme may not provide residential accommodation in the form of dwellings. That possibility is not precluded by the operation of the C3 Use Class and its interaction with the C2 Use Class” (para 65).

Whilst this decision will, at first glance, be seen as disappointing to many housing with care developers, there are some positives that can be taken from it including:

  • it offers a recent Court endorsed example of a housing with care scheme that falls within Use Class C2 despite having some of the hallmarks that LPAs and the Mayor assert as representing C3 development, i.e. independent dwellings (some up to 4 bedrooms) with communal facilities and only 1 x 65 year old resident being required to need and have a minimum of 2 hours of personal care per week;
  • it makes clear that it is the wording of the affordable housing policy itself as to whether or not a development has to provide affordable housing.  If the policy says developments falling within Use Class C2 are exempt from having to provide affordable housing then this decision does not change that;
  • if the affordable housing policy does not exclude C2 schemes then housing with care schemes should expect to provide policy compliant levels of affordable housing, subject to viability and a viability argument should be made (and can be won).
  • a new planning category/use class (i.e. C2R) for housing with care is not the answer.  Instead, energy should be focussed on lobbying the Government and LPAs to properly recognise the benefits of housing with care and plan for them with CIL and affordable housing at an appropriate viable rate if not exempt entirely.
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn
Subscribe and stay updated
Receive our latest blog posts by email.
Stay in Touch
Rachael Herbert

About Rachael Herbert

Rachael is a senior associate in the Firm's Planning team and is based in London. She joined the Firm in August 2013 after working for four and a half years as a lawyer in Australia specializing in planning and environment work.

All posts Full bio

RELATED POSTS

  • Development
  • Housebuilding
  • Planning Conditions
  • Planning Obligations
  • Planning Permission
  • Planning Policy

The risk of flooding

A spate of major floods across the UK, warnings that global warming will lead to more frequent heavy rainfall events […]

By Roy Pinnock
  • Development
  • Localism
  • Planning Permission

Money Back Guarantee for Planning?

The Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 introduced several measures to speed up the planning process.  We have recently reviewed a […]

By Lucy McDonnell
  • Affordable Housing
  • Community Infrastructure Levy
  • Development
  • Planning Obligations

Another Repealing Prospect

Having suggested already that section 123 LGA 1972 (best consideration) and section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 (highways contributions) […]

By Roy Pinnock

About Dentons

Across over 80 countries, Dentons helps you grow, protect, operate and finance your organization by providing uniquely global and deeply local legal solutions. Polycentric, purpose-driven and committed to inclusion, diversity, equity and sustainability, we focus on what matters most to you. www.dentons.com

Grow, Protect, Operate, Finance. Dentons, the law firm of the future is here. Copyright 2023 Dentons. Dentons is a global legal practice providing client services worldwide through its member firms and affiliates. Please see dentons.com for Legal notices.

Categories

Dentons logo in black and white

© 2025 Dentons

  • Legal notices
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies on this site