Southampton City Council v Hallyard Ltd

Southampton City Council v Hallyard Ltd

The obligations imposed on Cindan by the Custom House agreement are not planning obligations within section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 because the agreement does not state what Cindan’s interest was in the St Mary’s site, failing to comply with section 106(9)(c). Therefore, the City Council cannot rely on section 106(3) to enforce those obligations against successors in title or third parties such as Hallyard or AIB.

Parties
Claimant: Southampton City Council; Defendant: Hallyard Limited; Interested Party: AIB Group (UK) PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Obligations on Cindan under the Custom House agreement are not enforceable as planning obligations under section 106; City Council cannot enforce against Hallyard or AIB under section 106.
Legal Topics
Section 106 Agreements, Affordable Housing, Local Land Charges, Privity of Contract, Planning Obligations
Planning Law Contract Law Property Law Section 106 Agreements Affordable Housing Local Land Charges Privity of Contract Planning Obligations

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Southampton City Council

Claimant

Hallyard Limited

Defendant

AIB Group (UK) PLC

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Cindan or Hallyard was under a positive obligation to provide affordable housing on the St Mary’s site in excess of the units specified in the Cindan or Hallyard agreements
  2. 2 Whether there was any restriction placed on the development or use of the St Mary’s site in the absence of provision of affordable housing in excess of the specified units
  3. 3 Whether the obligations on Cindan under the Custom House agreement bind successors in title or third parties such as Hallyard or AIB

Ratio Decidendi

The obligations imposed on Cindan by the Custom House agreement are not planning obligations within section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 because the agreement does not state what Cindan’s interest was in the St Mary’s site, failing to comply with section 106(9)(c). Therefore, the City Council cannot rely on section 106(3) to enforce those obligations against successors in title or third parties such as Hallyard or AIB.

Court Disposition

Obligations on Cindan under the Custom House agreement are not enforceable as planning obligations under section 106; City Council cannot enforce against Hallyard or AIB under section 106.