Sainsbury’s appeals defeat in supermarket dispute with Tesco

Sainsbury’s is to appeal against a High Court ruling that Wolverhampton Council’s January 2008 decision to approve in principle a compulsory purchase order (CPO) to force Sainsbury’s to sell its 86% share of the Raglan Street site to rival Tesco was lawful. Wolverhampton planners had found that Tesco’s plans to redevelop the nearby dilapidated Royal Hospital site as part of its successful bid, which would provide 100 homes and new offices for the city’s primary care trust, was “decisive” in their decision to approve the CPO. Christopher Lockhart-Mummery QC, counsel for Sainsbury’s, had argued that the decision to use CPO powers was unlawful. He argued that the council had no power to acquire land for the purpose of facilitating the development of an unrelated site and that it had taken into account immaterial considerations, namely the benefits of securing development of an unrelated site. Elias J dismissed Sainsbury’s challenge on the “fundamental” point of whether, when determining in whose favour the CPO should be exercised, the council was entitled to have regard to the benefits of the Royal Hospital development. He said: “When deciding which development should receive its support, the council could have regard to all the benefits accruing from the proposed development, including any off-site benefits achieved by way of a section 106 agreement.” Court of Appeal judges Ward, Mummery and Sullivan LJJ have reserved judgment until a later date.