Friday, 12 April 2013

Invalid Planning Agreements – the limits of Section 106

Planning lawyers and town planners have received a shock with the judgment of the High Court in Westminster City Council v. SSCLG [2013] EWHC 690 (Admin) in which judgment was given by Belinda Bucknall QC on 27 March 2013.

I was going to write a piece on this judgment, but my colleague David Brock has beaten me to it, and so I recommend that you take a look at David’s post (which can be accessed by clicking on the direct link on the left-hand side of this page).

As David points out, this was a salutary case, and he has some pertinent observations to make on the issues that this case raises. It is a pity that De-CLoG takes so little notice of what they are told by planning professionals, and especially by planning lawyers with hands-on experience of the problems thrown up by planning legislation. We know what we are talking about, which most politicians certainly don’t, and the politicians are frankly ill-served by their civil servants.



  1. "ill-served by their civil servants"

    An understatement!

  2. A bit late - sorry, I'm a slow thinker. Obviously it's great fun exposing and overturning invalid planning agreements, but in some instances I can sympathise with the Local Authorities (not a phrase you'll often hear from these lips!). For instance, where parking is genuinely at a premium, what steps if any can and should an LA take to discourage occupants of new properties from acquiring parking permits. Or would that be giving the game away?