The 10-word, 292-year-old quote that gave Andy Burnham’s office a massive headache this week

“Be you ever so high, the law is above you.” These 10 words, written 292 years ago, gave Andy Burnham’s office a big headache this week.

Originally written by physician Thomas Fuller in 1733, the quote remained famous in legal circles after it was revived by Lord Justice Denning in 1977.

So famous that a lawyer acting for the mayor’s office decided to use it in 2023.

At the time, government inspectors were examining the Places for Everyone development masterplan. It was ultimately approved and adopted by nine Greater Manchester boroughs last spring.

But the blueprint was controversial from the off, 11 years ago.

Opponents criticised the amount of green belt land it set aside for development, ultimately forcing Stockport to withdraw in late 2020. Oldham flirted with following them last year.

During the 2023 examinations, inspectors were assessing how much land should be added to the green belt. Initially, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) said 49 parcels of land should receive protected green belt status.

Then, on March 9 2023, the GMCA introduced a new ‘legal test’, which cut the list of 49 areas down to 17, later revised to 19.

No explanation other than ‘the exacting legal test now applies and they do not meet it’ was given, a court heard this week.

Lawyers for the GMCA argued two years ago inspectors should accept the ‘new test’ and reduced green belt because ‘the law is the law’, Jenny Wigley KC told the High Court on Wednesday (October 8).

Inspectors were then ‘told Lord Denning says you have to get into line’, as judge Mrs Justice Lang put it.
They did.

But campaigners have brought a legal case to the Royal Courts of Justice, arguing accepting this new test ‘erred in law’.

They claimed introducing the ‘new test’ meant inspectors ‘erred by thinking they were constrained’ so they effectively disregarded other ‘exceptional circumstances’ which permit land to be added to the green belt.

Ms Wigley KC added: “They have accepted there’s a different ‘higher bar’ which has led them astray.”

Campaigners also criticised having ‘very little time’ to seek legal advice on the test.

However, Leon Glenister, representing the government, said using it was ‘accepted’ by everyone.

“The inspectors accepted those criteria. They were opened out and discussed in the hearing. No one questioned the approach,” he said.
And Vincent Fraser KC, representing major landowners Wain Estates, added on Thursday (October 9): “It starts with the premise ‘this was sprung on us and we did not get chance to respond’.

“That sounds like a procedural challenge and not an error in law. The inspectors allowed discussion almost three weeks later.

“But very importantly the changes then being made, i.e. the removal of the 28 sites proposed to be put into the green belt and not put into the green belt, had to be made by main modification to the plan.

“That was subject to further consultation. That took place for two months.”

Mrs Justice Lang is yet to issue a judgement on the case.

At this stage, the only certainty proceedings have given is Places for Everyone’s 11-year-long saga will drag on, 19 months after it was supposed to be done and dusted.

In doing so, that will give Andy Burnham’s office an anxious wait to see what the plan’s future is.
But it does have a future.

Campaigners are ‘not seeking changes to the adopted plan’ but ‘remedy to the omission’, Ms Wigley KC said.
So Places for Everyone will live on regardless of the court ruling. That likely means its saga and controversy will too.