Woodford Land Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd

Woodford Land Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd

On the true construction of the Agreement, the burden of the costs of providing affordable housing under a section 106 agreement falls on Persimmon and is not deductible from the purchase price. The specific provisions of clause 21.3 prevail over the general provisions of paragraph 11 of schedule 7, and there is no need for rectification as the contract already reflects the parties' intentions.

Parties
Claimant: Woodford Land Limited; Defendant: Persimmon Homes Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Rectification Claim (contract) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Contract, Interpretation of Contract, Section 106 Agreements, Affordable Housing Obligations, Common Intention, Construction of Written Instruments
Contract Law Property Law Rectification of Contract Interpretation of Contract Section 106 Agreements Affordable Housing Obligations Common Intention Construction of Written Instruments

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woodford Land Limited

Claimant

Persimmon Homes Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Rectification Claim (contract) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs of providing affordable housing under a section 106 agreement are deductible from the purchase price under the contract or to be borne by the purchaser (Persimmon)
  2. 2 Whether the contract should be rectified to reflect the parties' common intention regarding affordable housing costs

Ratio Decidendi

On the true construction of the Agreement, the burden of the costs of providing affordable housing under a section 106 agreement falls on Persimmon and is not deductible from the purchase price. The specific provisions of clause 21.3 prevail over the general provisions of paragraph 11 of schedule 7, and there is no need for rectification as the contract already reflects the parties' intentions.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Rectification claim dismissed
  • No rectification of the Agreement ordered