Flynn, R (On the Application Of) v The London Borough of Southwark Council & Anor

Flynn, R (On the Application Of) v The London Borough of Southwark Council & Anor

The section 106 agreement was within the scope of the planning committee's resolution and the officers' delegated authority; the arrangements for affordable housing, including the 'build to sell' fall-back and viability review mechanism, were lawful and policy-compliant; any differences between 'social rented' and 'social rent equivalent' accommodation were not material; the committee was not materially misled about GLA grant funding; and, even if there had been an error, it is highly likely the outcome would have been the same.

Parties
Appellant: Jerry Flynn; First Respondent: The London Borough of Southwark Council; Second Respondent: Elephant and Castle Properties Co. Ltd.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning) / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Delegation of Authority, Section 106 Agreements, Affordable Housing Policy, Judicial Review, Vires of Planning Obligations, Material Misdirection, Viability Review Mechanisms
Planning Law Administrative Law Local Government Law Delegation of Authority Section 106 Agreements Affordable Housing Policy Judicial Review Vires of Planning Obligations +2 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jerry Flynn

Appellant

The London Borough of Southwark Council

First Respondent

Elephant and Castle Properties Co. Ltd.

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning) / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the section 106 agreement was ultra vires the planning committee's resolution
  2. 2 Whether the arrangements for the 'build to sell' fall-back were lawful
  3. 3 Whether the differences between 'social rented' and 'social rent equivalent' accommodation were material

Ratio Decidendi

The section 106 agreement was within the scope of the planning committee's resolution and the officers' delegated authority; the arrangements for affordable housing, including the 'build to sell' fall-back and viability review mechanism, were lawful and policy-compliant; any differences between 'social rented' and 'social rent equivalent' accommodation were not material; the committee was not materially misled about GLA grant funding; and, even if there had been an error, it is highly likely the outcome would have been the same.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; High Court order upheld; no relief granted to appellant