Earlier this year, the Court of Appeal considered three cases: Ex Parte Holdings & Barnes Plc, Ex Parte Alconbury Developments Limited and Ex Parte Legal & General Assurance Society Limited. It found that, because the Secretary of State is responsible for setting planning policy and, at the same time, acts in a quasi-judicial capacity in planning appeals, his role breached Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, which became legally binding in England and Wales at the beginning of this year. Article 6(1) guarantees European citizens the right to a fair trial by an independent tribunal.

Under current practice, the Secretary of State can call in any planning, highways or compulsory purchase matter and convene a public inquiry, after which he decides the matter. The Law Lords found unanimously that the process does not infringe the human rights of developers.

James Scott, a partner at solicitors Decherts, told GlobeSt.com: 'It is business as usual for the Secretary of State and it is unlikely that he will change his approach to determining these matters. It can also be expected that the Secretary of State will take a more robust approach to calling in planning applications for major developments than he has for a while.'

The current Secretary of State for the Environment, Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, is widely expected to step aside after next month's general election. Had the House of Lords not overturned the Alconbury case, his successor would have been faced with the prospect of a root and branch reform of the planning system as soon as he or she took office.