Shropshire border intensive chicken shed plans overturned after legal challenge

The council reversed its decision after facing a legal challenge from the campaign group Communities Against Factory Farming (CAFF), who argued that the original approval was unlawful due to deficiencies in the assessment of environmental impacts and animal welfare concerns.

The proposed unit would have housed approximately 70,000 broiler chickens at any one time, resulting in an annual production of around 525,000 birds. Despite nearly 1,000 objections from local residents and environmental groups, the development was initially granted permission on 9 October 2025.

Legal pressure forces council u-turn

CAFF initiated legal proceedings by sending a pre-action protocol letter to the council on 16 October 2025, laying the groundwork for a judicial review. In early November 2025, the council conceded, acknowledging that the original decision should be quashed. The formal nullification of the planning permission is now set to be rubber-stamped by the High Court.

CAFF's legal grounds centred on breaches of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations. Specifically, the group argued that the Planning Officer failed to adequately consider crucial factors, including:

Cumulative Impacts: The effects of odour, pollution, nuisance, and water-abstraction when assessed alongside a neighbouring intensive dairy unit.

Downstream Pollution: The resulting water and air pollution from manure, dust, and project-specific greenhouse gas emissions.

Animal Welfare: CAFF argued that a councillor misdirected himself by believing he could not take the Animal Welfare Charter into consideration, a key concern for the campaign group.

The successful legal action was led by Acland Bryant of the Garden Court Environmental Law & Climate Justice Team, instructed by Matthew McFeeley at Richard Buxton Solicitors, on behalf of CAFF.

Community and campaigners speak out

The news has been met with relief and delight from the local community, who initially felt overwhelmed by the prospect of a new source of pollution and health risks on their doorstep.

Sandra Daniels, 66, a retired Willoughbridge resident, voiced the community's relief: “The residents of Willoughbridge and beyond are delighted that sense has finally prevailed… Over 900 objections to the proposal were received. They identified that risking a major ecological catastrophe with pollution to the River Tern and beyond… was never going to be acceptable.”

Ms Daniels noted that residents feared a "new Big Stink" that would damage the environment, mental health, and impact visitors to the internationally renowned Dorothy Clive Garden.

Maya Pardo, legal strategy coordinator at CAFF, said the victory highlights the need for councils to take animal welfare seriously: “We are so pleased that the council has acknowledged its decision couldn’t lawfully stand. Councils have full discretion to consider animal welfare—and it’s time they used it. Factory farms cause intense animal suffering… These harms must carry real weight in planning, not be brushed aside.”

Ms Pardo added: "Building new intensive farms is a step in the wrong direction, not only for animal welfare, but also for tackling the escalating challenges of climate change, river pollution, and bird flu."

The Environmental Law Foundation, who supported CAFF, stated that the case serves as a "clear reminder to LPAs [Local Planning Authorities] that failure to adequately scrutinise the impacts of these major farming developments will leave them open to legal challenge.”