Why Animal Welfare as a Material Consideration Could Transform Breeding Licences

Recent discussions in breeder support groups show the same question coming up over and over again.

“Why do I need planning permission before my breeding licence granted — and why has a neighbouring breeder with a similar set-up not been through the planning process”

Some dog breeders are told they must apply for a “change of use” from residential to business. This could be because the business is seen as a Kennel Environment.

Some councils bring planning officers into licensing inspections, others don’t. The result is usually the defintion of the environment which creates the confusion and most likely mistrust.

MLB has had members ask us to help clarify the regulations, because their dogs have dedicated space outside and thus been deemed as a kennel environment.

However, the local authorities planning department could get involved for different reasons even after planning is granted – heres why…

New developments in planning when animals are involved.

The High Court’s judgment in Animal Equality UK v North East Lincolnshire Council has raised the stakes. The Court confirmed that animal welfare is a material planning consideration. That means planning departments are more likely to get involved in breeding applications and objectors from neighbours and animal welfare orgnaisations are more likely to challenge them.

If councils apply planning rules inconsistently, they could risk losing challenges in court, where poor reasoning and weak documentation may be exposed.

However, another prime example is in a recent case where East Lindsey Council Refused breeding establishment on Welfare Grounds when animal welfare concerns were raised following objections from 74 residents and campaigners from Animal Rising.

In September 2025, East Lindsey District Council rejected plans for a new dog breeding facility at Longlands Farm, Minting, near Horncastle. The applicant, had sought permission to convert an agricultural building into a breeding site. The proposal was first deferred in August for a site visit with officers recommending approval with conditions, but members voted to refuse the plan the following month after councillors raised serious animal welfare concerns.

During the debate, councillors explicitly referred to animal welfare as a planning consideration, echoing the High Court’s reasoning in Animal Equality UK v North East Lincolnshire Council.

What is a material consideration?

In planning law, a material consideration is any factor that is relevant to deciding whether to grant or refuse planning permission.

The scope is wide, but the courts have made clear that planning is about land use in the public interest. Importantly, there is a legal distinction between whether something counts as a material consideration, and the weight given to it in a decision.

The judgment lies soley with the planning authority, provided it has considered all relevant factors. The Animal Equality case reaffirmed that animal welfare is capable of being a material consideration, meaning councils can lawfully weigh it in the same way they already consider issues like traffic, noise, or environmental impact.

What is the Knock-on effect for licensing

When planning and licensing aren’t aligned:

Breeders face uncertainty, extra costs, and appeals they can’t predict.
Councils risk undermining both licensing and planning if they can’t show clear, consistent application of the guidence and regulations.

The recent Tribunal case of Rebecca Latter v Barnsley MBC shows what happens when licensing decisions are poorly evidenced. The same risk now applies to planning conditions.

What needs to change

Clear national guidance is needed to set out when planning permission is required alongside a breeding licence.
Consistent training for officers, licensing and planning teams should apply the same framework, not contradict each other.
Better documentation, if welfare is material, both planning and licensing decisions must show how it was considered and evidenced.

Conclusion

Breeders are right to be frustrated. Inconsistent planning involvement makes compliance harder, not easier. With the courts confirming that animal welfare is material, councils can no longer afford patchwork approaches. Consistency isn’t just fairer — it’s the only way decisions will stand up if challenged.

For breeders, the takeaway is clear: check that all your paperwork is in order and that you fully understand your licence conditions. Challenges to decisions are only going to increase, and having thorough, up-to-date records is the best way to protect both your licence and your reputation.