Use of artificial intelligence in casework evidence

The Inspectorate understands that AI can be used to support our work, and that this can be done positively when it is properly and transparently used.  

You may use artificial intelligence (AI) to help prepare information you send to the Planning Inspectorate if you follow this guidance which explains what you should tell us when AI has been used to create or substantially change any part of your submission. 

We ask for this information so Inspectors can understand the source and handling of the material they are assessing. This helps them make fair, transparent and well reasoned decisions. The requirements are designed to be simple and not burdensome. 

A ‘golden rule’ for any use of AI is that you must use AI responsibly. It is your responsibility to ensure that the information generated is accurate and appropriate. 

Due to the evolving capability and application of AI we will keep this guidance under review.

When you need to tell us about AI use 

Tell us if you have intentionally used AI to: 

• draft or substantially rewrite text 
• produce a summary or analysis 
• generate or alter images or videos 
• create content that goes beyond straightforward formatting or presentation 

How to provide your declaration 

You only need to provide a short statement.  

This can be in your covering email, letter or included as part of your statement and/or proof of evidence.  

Examples of declarations are provided later in this guidance.

What to include in your statement 

Please briefly state: 

• That AI was used. 

• What it was used for and how it was used.  For example:

  • If it was used to draft an objection in general or a specific part of an objection.
  • Where it has been used for a specific part of a document, this should be made clear such as by reference to paragraph numbers, sections or appendices.
  • If any images or videos have been generated or altered, say which parts have been developed with AI tools and how.
• What checks you made and that you take responsibility for the accuracy of the content. 

What is not required

AI is becoming more and more embedded in core business and day to day tools and it is therefore appreciated that users often cannot tell where or when those features have operated. For example, AI assisted spelling and grammatical checks are commonplace. 

You do not need to tell us about routine tools such as spellchecking, grammar suggestions, formatting tools, or accessibility functions. Rather, we are seeking information on deliberate and substantive use of AI tools to create or materially alter the content of a submission.

The role of parties

All parties are expected to take responsibility for the accuracy and lawfulness of the material they submit.  Sensible use is encouraged. The following provides advice for the different type of party who may be involved in the application, appeal or examination process.

Professional parties 

Whether you are an employee of a Local Authority, or in private practice, if you are a member of a professional body, you should also use AI in line with your professional code of practice. 

Some cases involve multiple experts producing multiple documents for consideration. For example, a viability study to support a planning appeal undertaken by a chartered surveyor or a field survey produced by a qualified archaeologist.

In such cases, you must produce your own declaration when AI has been intentionally used. Some larger cases will involve multiple declarations by multiple experts; a ‘catch all’ declaration is unlikely to provide the level of information required. The advice on what to include given above could be incorporated into your endorsement.  

The Planning Inspectorate also publishes various procedural guidance which relates to general obligations on those submitting documents.

• For Planning Appeals please see section 15 of Procedural Guide: Planning appeals – England - GOV.UK
• For Local Plans please see section 4 of Procedure Guide for Local Plan Examinations - GOV.UK and section 6 of Procedural guide for Examinations and Gateways under the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2026 - GOV.UK
• For National Infrastructure Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects: Advice on the Preparation and Submission of Application Documents - GOV.UK

Local Planning Authorities (LPAs)

We are aware of LPAs increasingly exploring the use of AI tools to assist them in the case management and decision-making processes.

If an LPA has used AI tools this needs to be clearly signposted to PINS as per the above guidance on what to include.

It is important to note that if the LPA you work for is using AI as a summarisation tool, you must provide PINS with the original copies of documentation associated with a case. For example, only providing a summary of representations as part of the appeal questionnaire is not acceptable. This is because providing only document summaries may not comply with the relevant Regulations. It also risks depriving an Inspector of material considerations which, for example were contained in the original submissions, but omitted from the summary.

Appellants/Applicants

If you have used AI tools to summarise formal consultation responses (for example as part of the examination of a National Infrastructure project) the advice given above for LPAs would also apply.

Interested parties 

Interested parties may use AI to help draft or translate their representation. If you do, please include a short statement saying so.  

You should follow the advice above on what to include in your statement, making sure you are clear about taking responsibility for what you send.

It is important that the inspector hears the voices of local communities when they are reviewing all the information related to the case, but that it is as focused and relevant as possible to help them understand the arguments. Improper or overuse of AI can stop the Inspector from understanding the main points being put forward.

Why we ask for this information 

Providing a brief statement helps the Inspector understand how the material was produced and assess it fairly.

When used sensibly, AI presents a very useful tool. However, the results it gives are not always perfect hence why it is important that it is checked for its accuracy.  

AI is also capable of creating fake representations or evidence, or other types of fake text and images.  Improper use of AI to create cartoons or exaggerated illustrations of a proposal is also cautioned against.

The steps outlined above should help you consider how you have used AI in your submissions. It should also help to mitigate risk of adding additional burden / unnecessary time to the case. This is important as improper use could be at risk of being found as an example of unreasonable behaviour, and open to an award of costs.  

By following this guidance, you will help us, our Inspectors, and other people involved to understand the origin, purpose, and accuracy of the information. This will help everyone to interpret it and understand it properly.  This helps Inspectors understand the evidence and make fair decisions. 

There may be times where an Inspector will seek clarification on the use of AI if they have specific queries or concerns.

Examples of AI Declarations

From an interested party:

“I have used AI to help me draft my comments on the planning policies.

I have also used it to help me summarise and understand the transport assessment and to help me draft my comments in response to this technical document. 

 I have checked my response and I am responsible for what it says.

Signed by

An Interested Party” 

From a planning agent:

“In accordance with the Planning Inspectorate Guidance on the use of AI in casework evidence, I set out below the extent to which AI technology has been used in the preparation of this appeal. This declaration is provided to ensure full transparency regarding the preparation of appeal evidence.

AI was used to draft the Statement of Case. In particular it was used to

• assist in researching the site history;
• identify relevant planning policies in the Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan;
• generate an image of the proposed development
• assist in summarising the interested party representations made on the original planning application and identify key topics raised by them.

I have cross checked all of these for accuracy. The image has been provided for illustrative purposes only and I consider this to be an accurate illustrative representation of the proposed extension.

I would also like to make clear that:

• AI was not used to formulate professional planning judgements on the merits of the proposal.
• All quotes that have been included are genuine, unedited extracts from the original source documents.

I have reviewed and edited the final contents of my submissions, and I take full professional responsibility for them. 

Signed by:

An Agent”

Data protection and sensitive information 

Please ensure that you have met your responsibilities under data protection regulations before entering sensitive or personal information into AI tools. What is personal data? - ICO

Contact 

If you need further help with how to provide this information, contact the relevant case team using your case reference. 

Any other questions should be directed via our Customer Services Team.