The High Court has ruled that a change in planning policy did not entitle Harrogate Borough Council to renege on a deal allowing them to purchase property for £1 on the condition that they would grant outline planning consent for seven bungalows.
The deal was made between the council and the predecessor in title of Kebbell Development, under the provisions of section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
The council agreed to grant outline consent for seven bungalows on land at Knaresborough Road, Bishop Monkton, Harrogate, with a requirement that work on the development commenced within five years. The deal also provided that the council’s approval for reserved matters should be obtained by March 2001.
However, reserved matters were not agreed by that date, and the local authority refused an application by Kebbell in September 2001 to proceed without complying with the relevant time limit. A planning inspector later dismissed Kebbell’s challenge to that decision.
The inspector took the view that there had been a subsequent change in planning policy, and there was nothing in the terms of the agreement that placed the council under an obligation to continue to view the development plan favourably.
However, Sir Richard Tucker has now ruled that the deal had created a quasi-contractual relationship, and that the council were acting unfairly in disregarding it.
The judge accepted that there had been a change in the council’s planning policy but said that Kebbell had a legitimate expectation that the council would abide by the deal. There was therefore a fatal flaw in the planning inspector’s decision and Kebbell’s challenge was allowed.
Kebbell Development Ltd (t/a Kebbell Homes) v First Secretary of State and another Queen’s Bench Division (Richard Tucker) 24 March 2003.
Harry Wolton QC and Robin Green (instructed by North Yorkshire Law) appeared for the claimant; Timothy Mould (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared for the defendants.
References: PLS News 25/3/03
