The Campaign to Protect Wicklesham Quarry from Development has been immeasurably strengthened by the judge’s findings in the Judicial Review, even though he has failed to quash the Neighbourhood Plan. My objection to the Independent Examiner in 2015 that the policy was excluded development resulted in him modifying the policy, because a Neighbourhood Plan cannot make provision for a ‘county matter’. Policy 4.5B was a ‘county matter’, as Oxfordshire County Council also clearly informed Faringdon Council in July 2014. However, the council disregarded this advice. Judge John Howell’s ruling, which sought to give clarity to the examiner’s modifications, means that Wicklesham quarry cannot be safeguarded for employment use until the existing planning conditions have been fully complied with. Both the Restoration and Aftercare Schemes must be carried out. The Aftercare Scheme, which returns the land to agriculture, lasts five years following completion of the Restoration Scheme. Any attempt to vary the existing planning conditions in defiance of the judge’s ruling is likely to result in a legal challenge, and we have little doubt that Oxfordshire County Council will wish to be seen upholding its policies to the letter. The landowner’s strategy of seeking to use the Neighbourhood Plan to wriggle out of planning conditions to which he agreed has backfired, as the quarry is now firmly locked in to planning conditions set by the County Council, and under judicial scrutiny. The Judge also ruled that Faringdon Council’s belief that Wicklesham Quarry was a ‘brownfield site’ – and assumption that it benefited from a presumption in favour of development – was wrong, and showed disregard of national policy. Neither the Examiner nor the District Council corrected this error in the Basic Conditions Statement. This fact has also been pointed out to Faringdon Council since 2014, which they similarly chose to ignore. The Neighbourhood Plan continued to state that ‘stakeholders’ regarded Wicklesham Quarry as a “significant opportunity” for development - which it was not. Judge Howell has further ruled that the policy is in conflict with Local Plan policy GS2, which places strict controls on development outside the urban settlement boundary. This means that the policy for Wicklesham Quarry fails to meet the basic conditions, which are a legal requirement. The Judge stated: “Neither the examiner nor the District Council were lawfully satisfied that the FNP satisfied the basic condition that the making of the plan was in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan”. In view of the High Court’s agreement with these grounds of the Judicial Review, and their impact on the flawed allocation of Wicklesham Quarry, it is disappointing that the Judge decided not to quash the Neighbourhood Plan. In fact, he concluded that because of the District Council’s unprecedented actions in adopting the Neighbourhood Plan while under legal challenge, a separate and additional claim for Judicial Review would have been necessary for the court to quash the plan. Even so, it is clear that Faringdon Council’s aim to use the Neighbourhood Plan to trump both the Quarry’s planning conditions and the strategic policies of the Local Plan has failed comprehensively. The High Court has demonstrated that the policy was ill-founded and failed to meet the basic conditions. These facts discredit the policy. The barriers that the High Court has placed against developing the Quarry are now so high it seems unlikely that it will ever be developed as an industrial estate. Local supporters of the campaign regard the judge’s denial of a remedy as unjust in the circumstances, however if the quarry is protected from development and returned to agricultural use in accordance with its surroundings on the beautiful Corallian ridge, we shall be delighted. That was the whole aim of the campaign. This welcome prospect has just become a lot more likely as a result of the Judicial Review.