UK: Compulsory Purchase - Further Complications

Last Updated: 5 October 2010
Article by Murray Shaw

The capacity of supermarkets to go to war with each other over sites appears to be unlimited. Both in Scotland and in England there has been significant litigation where either one supermarket chain or another has been seeking to develop a site in preference to a site proposed by a rival or alternatively seeking to stop a rival with a view to protecting an existing outlet [Click here to view the Supermarket Wars Article].

The most recent manifestation of this in the English courts reached the Supreme Court (which has replaced the House of Lords), involved Sainsbury and concerned use of compulsory purchase powers. The commercial issues were referred to in the Opinion of Lord Phillips in the following terms:- "Each purchased its land in the hope of being able to use it for the purpose of the development. Each shares the intention that its land should be used for the development. In resisting the compulsory purchase of its land each is motivated by commercial rivalry, not by any objection to the land being used for the proposed development".

The use of compulsory purchase powers by a planning authority for the benefit of a commercial operator has been an area of some controversy before the courts recently. In 2006 a Scottish case involving Standard Commercial Property Securities Limited and Glasgow City Council was decided by the House of Lords. That case in essence concerned a "fight" over a commercial development in Glasgow between rival developers, though the specific issue in question was whether or not the disposal of the property which was to be compulsorily acquired was at the best price that could reasonably be obtained as required by the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. That case was referred to in the Sainsbury supermarket case though it would appear that not all the Supreme Court judges had a common interpretation of what the outcome of that case was.

More recently there was further controversy in relation to the already controversial Trump development in Aberdeenshire where it appeared that a request might be made for the Council to exercise compulsory purchase powers to acquire land to facilitate the development to be carried out by the Trump Organisation. At least some of the land was owned by private householders who resided there. There was a debate in the Council Chambers on a motion seeking to make clear that the Council would not use its compulsory purchase powers in that scenario. The motion was not carried largely on the basis that the majority of Councillors thought the position academic as there was no specific proposal before them to consider.

The issue before the Supreme Court essentially boiled down to a fight between Sainsbury and Tesco. Sainsbury owned 86% of a site while Tesco owned most of the remainder. Both companies wished to develop the site and accepted that it should be developed for supermarket purposes. No development could take place however unless the interest of one or other supermarket was bought out. That could only be done if the local authority used its compulsory purchase powers. Tesco owned another site about 850 metres away which contained a number of listed buildings many of which were in poor condition. The local authority had for a number of years been keen to secure regeneration of the site. Tesco did not think it was viable financially to develop the other site on its own but offered to link its scheme for the supermarket site with development of that other site on the basis that this would amount to a subsidy equal to the loss it might sustain in carrying out the development of the other site on its own. The local authority in light of that offer agreed to use the compulsory purchase powers to acquire Sainsbury's interest in the supermarket site. Sainsbury sought to challenge that on the basis that the local authority was taking into account an illegitimate concern.

Sainsbury's action was unsuccessful both at first instance and before the Court of Appeal. In the Supreme Court however they were successful albeit on a 4-3 majority. To complicate matters all 7 Supreme Court justices issued opinions not all of which are obviously consistent (even amongst those on the same side). It is interesting that Baroness Hale in a recent interview (quoted in The Times) questioned whether it was appropriate for there to be separate opinions from each Supreme Court justice. Other courts (notably the Supreme Court in America) do not customarily proceed in this manner.

There was a degree of consistency amongst the Supreme Court judges about the principles. The clear majority considered:-

  1. That the principles which applied to the determination of planning applications could apply (by analogy) to compulsory acquisition for development purposes;
  2. However the compulsory acquisition was only possible if it was within powers given by statute to local authorities. A number of the Supreme Court justices considered that given the nature of the compulsory purchase process a strict application of the relevant principles was required with the consequence that before off site benefits could be taken into account they had to be clearly related to the proposal for which the compulsory purchase powers would be used.

Where the diversions primarily occurred was in relation to the application of these principles to the particular facts of this case. Four of the judges held that the financial connection did not constitute a relevant connection to be taken into account and that was the position irrespective of the fact that the two supermarkets were in competition. Three of the Supreme Court justices came to a different conclusion.

The only Scottish Supreme Court justice involved in the case was Lord Hope. His perspective was that both the Tesco and Sainsbury scheme could justify the use of compulsory purchase powers by the Council. He was therefore of the view that when there was an equality of position and there was no issue of the use of the powers being illegal, it was legitimate to go on to look at other considerations. He made reference to the terms of the Standard Commercial Property Case and the fact that it held that a Council in deciding to sell land compulsorily acquired could take into account considerations such as those offered by Tesco. The land in this case was not being acquired by the Council to be utilised by the Council but acquired for onward sale. As he saw it, the decision about exercising the powers and then disposing of the land were an integral part of a common process and in that analysis achieving wider benefits might therefore be a legitimate consideration. In his view the approach taken by the majority could well make it impossible for certain urban renewal projects ever to be carried through. Urban renewal projects are an area where compulsory purchase powers are often critical to the site assembly process. He shared the view of Lord Phillips that it would be unfortunate "if a rigid application of the compulsory purchase principles to proposals of that kind were to rob the community of such benefit". He accordingly dissented from the majority view.

Baroness Hale was part of the majority and reached a different conclusion relying at least in part on the Standard Commercial Property Case. While she accepted use of compulsory purchase powers might well operate in tandem with the decision as to whom the land would be sold, it was not relevant in her view to rely upon the criteria in the sale part of the process to justify the first part of the process namely the decision to use compulsory purchase powers. She suggested to do so was putting cart before horse. In her view (and that of the majority) the decision to use compulsory purchase powers had to be justified specifically on the basis of the statutory provision and taking into account extraneous considerations such as the offer made by Tesco was not appropriate.

Presumably the Council will now have to rethink what they do in this case. It is not immediately clear how they can reach a decision given that the position between the two developments is relatively finely balanced and the benefits required to justify the use of compulsory purchase powers strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions will apparently flow from either supermarket being constructed.

More generally however this case is likely to make local authorities even more cautious about using compulsory purchase powers for the benefit of commercial developers. As Lord Hope apparently feared it may have an adverse impact upon urban renewal. Typically before local authorities agree to use such powers they want an agreement indemnifying them from the consequences. The outcome of this case may make such indemnities rather more costly in practice.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.