Traders at Shepherd’s Bush Market who fear a planned redevelopment will cost them their livelihoods are appealing this week in their challenge to a compulsory purchase order that will pave the way for the scheme.
Last July, the High Court dismissed the claim in which the traders argued the CPO should not have been granted in the absence of greater protections for the unique and diverse character of the market and their livelihoods.
Their appeal is scheduled to be heard on Wednesday or Thursday, and they hope the Court of Appeal will overturn the earlier decision and quash the CPO confirmed by the secretary of state.
Elizabeth Paraskeva, a senior associate in the real estate department at Bircham Dyson Bell, said it is a “significant” case as the High Court decision represents a departure from previous convention and is one which is beneficial to acquiring authorities.
She said: “The plans for the redevelopment of Shepherd’s Bush Market are controversial, with opinion divided. Although the planning inspector’s recommendation was for the order not to be confirmed, in part due to insufficient guarantees and financial safeguards for the long-standing market traders, the secretary of state disagreed and concluded that the order should be confirmed with modifications.
“The case is significant as it provides flexibility for acquiring authorities as it clarified that, although it is necessary to show a compelling case in the public interest in order to justify the making of a CPO, it does not have to prove every detail of the proposed scheme, nor does it need to show that protection for those affected is absolute.
“Interestingly, it was held that effective planning conditions and section 106 agreements can play a vital role in ensuring that these safeguarding mechanisms exist.”
She said that the High Court decision benefits local authorities as it will often be the case with regeneration projects that flexibility may be required as to the make-up of the final scheme.
She added: “However, that is not to say that this dilutes the legal obligations, as the purpose and justification for use of compulsory powers remain key and an acquiring authority must demonstrate that it has adequately assessed all requirements and properly promoted its CPO, carefully and proportionately, having regard to affected parties and that there is evidence of deliverability, together with a compelling case in the public interest.”
In the decision under challenge, Justice Dove said that there could be no doubt that the interests of safeguarding the market’s current qualities and character was a “key material consideration” that had been taken into account in the decision-making process.
He said: “There was no error of law in the decision which was reached by the defendant to confirm the CPO and this claim must fail.”
In 2012, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham granted planning permission to Orion Shepherd’s Bush Market Ltd to redevelop the site and adjoining land, including refurbishing the market and constructing new buildings of up to nine storeys to provide up to 212 residential units (up to 27,977 square metres) plus more than 14,000 square metres of non-residential floorspace. It then made the CPO confirmed by the secretary of state.
However, the Shepherd’s Bush Market Tenants Association, spearheaded by chair James Horada, say that the secretary of state’s decision – and thus the CPO – was based on errors of law.
jess.harrold@estatesgazette.com
