Form N462PC Explained: Planning Court Judicial Review Response

At a glance

• What it is: the Acknowledgment of Service used to respond to a judicial review or statutory review claim allocated to the Planning Court — the specialist list under CPR Part 54, Section II (rr.54.21-54.24).
• Who files it: the defendant, and any interested party who wants to take part in the case.
• Deadline: file within 21 days of service of the claim form (CPR 54.8(2)(a); PD 54D, para 4.14). This time limit cannot be extended by agreement between the parties (CPR 54.8(3)).
• Serve it on: the claimant and any other named party, as soon as practicable and no later than 7 days after filing (CPR 54.8(2)(b)).
• Court fee: none for filing the Acknowledgment of Service itself (GOV.UK civil court fees, EX50).
• If you miss the deadline: under CPR 54.9, you may not take part in the permission-stage hearing unless the court allows it, though you can still take part later if you comply with CPR 54.14.
• Aarhus Convention claims: dealt with in Section E; default costs caps of £5,000 (individual claimant), £10,000 (other claimants) and £35,000 (defendants) under CPR 46.26, variable or removable by the court under CPR 46.27.
• Governing framework: CPR Part 54, Practice Direction 54D, and section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981.

What Form N462PC is for

Form N462PC is the Planning Court's version of the judicial review Acknowledgment of Service. The Planning Court is a specialist list within the Administrative Court, dealing with claims involving planning permission, other development consents, enforcement of planning control, compulsory purchase orders, highways and rights of way, village greens, and EU-derived environmental legislation such as habitats and pollution control assessments, along with national or regional planning policy documents (CPR 54.21(2)).

When a claimant issues a claim marked "Planning Court", every party served with it who wants to take part must respond using N462PC. The form tells the court whether you accept or resist the claim, records anyone else who should be treated as an interested party, and can carry an application for procedural directions. It also lets a defendant ask the court to consider, under section 31(3C) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, whether the outcome for the claimant would have been substantially different even if the conduct complained of had not occurred — a ground the court must consider if the defendant raises it, and which can lead to permission being refused even where the underlying decision was flawed.

Filing N462PC is a procedural step, not your substantive defence. But because Planning Court claims run to tighter timescales than ordinary judicial reviews, and because the permission decision is often made on the papers, what you put in the form can shape the outcome long before any hearing.

Section-by-section walkthrough

The current version of the form (HMCTS, last updated December 2025) is organised into six lettered sections. Which ones you complete depends on the box you tick in Section A.

| Section | What it covers | When you complete it | |---|---|---| | A | Your position: contest all, contest part, don't contest, or (for a court/tribunal defendant) file a submission. Also where you ask the court to consider the s.31(3C) "outcome not substantially different" point. | Always — it determines which other sections apply. | | B | Name, address and contact details of anyone you consider should be added as an interested party. | If contesting the claim (all or in part), or filing a court/tribunal submission. | | C | Summary grounds for contesting the claim, or confirmation that you are filing only a formal submission as a court or tribunal. | If contesting the claim, all or in part. | | D | Any procedural directions you are asking the court to make (set out in the form or attached separately). | Optional — only if you want directions. | | E | Your response to an Aarhus Convention claim: whether you dispute the claimant's characterisation (E1), and whether you want the standard costs limits varied (E2). | Only if the claimant has marked the claim as an Aarhus Convention claim. | | F | Statement of truth, signature, and the address for service of further documents (plus counsel's details, if instructed). | Always. |

A few points worth flagging section by section:

Section A. If you tick "I do not intend to contest the claim," you complete only Section F — but you should still consider whether you want to be involved in any subsequent costs argument, since not contesting the claim does not automatically remove you from costs discussions. A court or tribunal named as a defendant or interested party has its own boxes: it can indicate it intends to make a submission (completing Sections B, C and F) or that it does not (Sections B and F only), reflecting the more limited role a decision-making tribunal typically plays in reviewing its own decision.

Section C. Keep the summary grounds focused on why permission should be refused or the claim should fail, addressing the claimant's actual pleaded grounds rather than restating the underlying planning merits. If you are only contesting part of the claim, say explicitly which part before setting out your grounds — the form asks for this.

Section D. If you want the case heard at a different Administrative Court venue than the one where it was issued, the form's own guidance notes that you should also complete, lodge and serve Form N464PC alongside your Acknowledgment of Service, rather than raising the venue point in Section D alone.

Section E. This section only needs completing where the claimant has already indicated the claim is an Aarhus Convention claim. If you accept that characterisation but think the standard costs caps are wrong for this case, E2 is where you ask the court to vary them — see the Aarhus section below.

Section F. The person signing must state whether they are the defendant, a litigation friend, or the defendant's legal representative as defined by CPR 2.3(1), and confirm all relevant facts have been disclosed — not just that the facts stated are true. Give a service address within the jurisdiction; if you have already instructed counsel, their details go on a separate page of the form.

The Planning Court's faster timetable

Planning Court claims sit within CPR 54.23, meaning the general Civil Procedure Rules and practice directions apply unless CPR Part 54 Section II or PD 54D says otherwise (CPR 54.23-54.24). PD 54D adds a categorisation layer: the Planning Liaison Judge can mark a claim "significant" where it involves substantial economic impact, an important point of law, significant public interest, technically complex material, or a nationally significant infrastructure project challenge (PD 54D, para 3.2). A party can make written representations on categorisation when issuing the claim or lodging the Acknowledgment of Service (PD 54D, para 3.3).

For significant claims, PD 54D paragraph 3.4 sets target timescales the parties should prepare to meet, including:

• permission applications determined within three weeks of the Acknowledgment of Service deadline expiring;
• oral renewals of permission applications heard within one month of the renewal request; and
• full judicial reviews heard within ten weeks of the deadline for the defendant's detailed grounds under CPR 54.14.

These are targets, subject to the interests of justice, not guarantees — but they illustrate why the 21-day Acknowledgment of Service deadline is treated strictly in the Planning Court. A late or thin filing can cost you the chance to be heard at the permission stage in a case that may otherwise move to a substantive hearing within a matter of months.

Aarhus Convention claims and costs protection

Many Planning Court claims touch environmental decision-making, which brings them within scope of the Aarhus Convention — an international agreement protecting public participation in environmental decisions and access to environmental justice without prohibitively expensive costs risk. Where a claimant marks the claim as an Aarhus Convention claim, CPR 46.24 to 46.28 apply automatically unless the defendant successfully disputes that characterisation.

Section E of N462PC is where a defendant responds:

• E1 — disputing the characterisation. If you do not accept the claim qualifies as an Aarhus Convention claim, you set out your reasons here. The court must resolve that dispute at the earliest opportunity, because it affects the costs exposure both sides face for the rest of the case.
• E2 — varying the costs limits. Even if you accept the claim is an Aarhus claim, you can ask the court to vary the standard caps. Under CPR 46.26, unless varied, the maximum a party can be ordered to pay is £5,000 for an individual claimant, £10,000 for any other claimant, and £35,000 for a defendant (figures inclusive of VAT). CPR 46.27 gives the court power to vary or remove these limits, but only if doing so would not make the proceedings prohibitively expensive for the claimant. Where there are multiple claimants or defendants, each cap applies to each party individually, not collectively.

Getting Section E right matters because Aarhus status is not just a costs technicality — it affects the financial risk both sides carry for the rest of the litigation, and disputes over categorisation are argued and decided early, often before permission itself is resolved.

What happens after you file

Once N462PC is filed and served, several things can happen in sequence:

1. The claimant may reply. Under CPR 54.8A and PD 54D paragraph 4.19, a claimant can file a Reply to your Acknowledgment of Service, but only where necessary for the permission decision — for example, to deal with a discrete point you raised that the claim form did not address. A Reply must be filed within 7 days of service of your Acknowledgment of Service and is capped at 5 pages without the court's permission.
2. Permission is considered, usually on the papers, taking your Section C summary grounds into account. If you asked the court to consider the section 31(3C) "outcome not substantially different" point in Section A, the court must address it if you raised it, though the court can disregard the usual bar to relief where there are reasons of exceptional public interest (Senior Courts Act 1981, s.31(2A)-(2C) and (3C)-(3F)).
3. If permission is refused on the papers, the claimant may request reconsideration at a hearing, unless the refusal is recorded as totally without merit (CPR 54.12).
4. If permission is granted, detailed grounds of resistance and any written evidence are due within 35 days of service of the permission order (CPR 54.14; PD 54D, para 4.37), and the case moves toward a substantive hearing on the Planning Court's tighter timetable described above.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Treating the 21-day deadline as flexible. It is not — CPR 54.8(3) rules out extension by agreement, and only the court can extend it.
• Leaving Section C too thin, or too long. The summary grounds should engage directly with the claimant's pleaded case; neither a bare denial nor a full skeleton argument does that well at the permission stage.
• Forgetting Form N464PC for venue disputes. If you want the case heard somewhere other than where it was issued, the form itself tells you to file N464PC alongside N462PC — raising it only in Section D is not the correct route.
• Assuming Aarhus status is automatic or fixed. If you think the claim has been wrongly characterised as an Aarhus Convention claim, or the standard cost caps are wrong for the case, Section E is where you have to say so — silence is generally taken as acceptance.
• Not checking who should sign Section F. The statement of truth wording differs depending on whether the signatory is the defendant personally, a litigation friend, or a legal representative under CPR 2.3(1).

Where to file

Completed forms, together with a copy, are lodged with the Administrative Court Office at the venue where the claim was issued (London, Birmingham, Cardiff, Leeds, or Manchester), within the 21-day deadline, with further copies served on the claimant, any other defendants, and any interested parties within 7 days of lodging. The current addresses for each Administrative Court Office are published with the form on GOV.UK — always check the version on GOV.UK before filing, since HMCTS periodically updates court addresses (most recently in December 2025).

This guide provides general information about Form N462PC and Planning Court judicial review procedure in England and Wales. It is not legal advice and is not a substitute for advice on your specific claim, its timescales, or its merits. The procedural rules described were accurate as at July 2026 and are subject to change — always check the current form and rules on GOV.UK and legislation.gov.uk before filing.