Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd, R (on the application of) v Swindon Borough Council & Anor

Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Ltd, R (on the application of) v Swindon Borough Council & Anor

The defendant acted unlawfully in issuing CIL Liability and Demand Notices by treating two separate planning permissions as one. The statutory scheme and the CIL Regulations require CIL to be charged only where planning permission is granted for chargeable development, and do not permit aggregation of separate permissions. The claimant's actions were lawful under the current statutory framework.

Parties
Claimant: The Queen (on the application of Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Limited); Defendant: Swindon Borough Council; Interested Party: Next PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed. Judgment for the claimant.
Legal Topics
Community Infrastructure Levy (cil), Interpretation of Planning Permissions, Statutory Construction, Tax Avoidance
Planning Law Tax Law Administrative Law Community Infrastructure Levy (cil) Interpretation of Planning Permissions Statutory Construction Tax Avoidance

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen (on the application of Orbital Shopping Park Swindon Limited)

Claimant

Swindon Borough Council

Defendant

Next PLC

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant acted lawfully in issuing CIL Liability and Demand Notices by treating two separate planning permissions as one for CIL purposes
  2. 2 Proper interpretation of regulation 6(1)(c) of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant acted unlawfully in issuing CIL Liability and Demand Notices by treating two separate planning permissions as one. The statutory scheme and the CIL Regulations require CIL to be charged only where planning permission is granted for chargeable development, and do not permit aggregation of separate permissions. The claimant's actions were lawful under the current statutory framework.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed. Judgment for the claimant.

Orders

  • The defendant's CIL Liability Notice and Demand Notice are quashed.