A group of Manchester residents opposed to gentrification have failed in a bid to stop a developer building a large student accommodation property on the site of an old pub in the Hulme area.
Campaign group Block the Block says on its website that local residents “have been fighting to stop profit-hungry developers from encroaching on their community for many years”.
The group says it has a plan for the site that includes a social centre and social housing. It says this will be impossible if the student accommodation is built.
Specifically, Block the Block is seeking to overturn Manchester City Council’s decision in June last year to grant planning permission to developer Curlew Alternatives Eighth Property LP. Curlew’s plan is to build multi-storey purpose-built student accommodation on the site on which the Gamecock public house previously stood.
Block the Block’s legal team argues that the permission is invalid because the advice given by council’s planning officers to the planning committee in both a written report and oral advice was “materially misleading”.
Specifically, it says planning officers told the committee there was “no planning policy basis” for them to refuse the application. This, say Block the Block’s legal team, was untrue as the planning committee always has the power to refuse a development, and doesn’t have to take the advice of its planning inspectors.
The case went to trial at the Planning Court in Manchester last month, and in a detailed ruling handed down on 1 May, trial judge Stephen Davies dismissed the appeal.
He said the long and detailed report wasn’t misleading when taken as a whole, and the oral advice, when looked at in context of the discussion at the meeting, was also not misleading.
Specifically, he said the planning officers didn’t mislead the planning committee.
“There is no reason for thinking that the planning committee was unaware that it was entitled – if it wished – to disagree with the planning officer and to refuse the application,” the judge said in his ruling.
“Whilst I am prepared to accept that the words ‘No planning policy basis’ are strongly expressed, I am satisfied they are not materially misleading,” he said. Instead, they reflect the “strong view” about the planning merits held by the planning officers.
The parties now have around a month to decide if they want to seek permission from the court to bring a further appeal.
Howard, R (On the Application Of) v Manchester City Council
The Planning Court at Manchester (HHJ Stephen Davies sitting as a High Court Judge) 1 May 2025
