Fishbourne Developments Ltd v Stephens

Fishbourne Developments Ltd v Stephens

The term 'Planning Permission' in the option agreement means permission for development of the whole or substantially the whole property by new building involving a change of use from agricultural use, not minor works. The notice served by Fishbourne based on the Roof Permission was invalid as it did not meet this threshold.

Parties
Appellant: Fishbourne Developments Limited; Respondent: Stephens
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Option Agreements, Planning Permission, Commercial Common Sense
Contract Law Property Law Interpretation of Option Agreements Planning Permission Commercial Common Sense

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fishbourne Developments Limited

Appellant

Stephens

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of 'Planning Permission' in an option agreement
  2. 2 Whether planning permission for part of property triggers option to purchase whole property
  3. 3 Meaning of 'development' in context of the agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'Planning Permission' in the option agreement means permission for development of the whole or substantially the whole property by new building involving a change of use from agricultural use, not minor works. The notice served by Fishbourne based on the Roof Permission was invalid as it did not meet this threshold.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the notice served by Fishbourne is invalid under clause 3.5 of the 2002 Option; costs not determined in this judgment.