Complete the form below to ask us a question or make an enquiry. We’ll get back to you via phone or email as soon as possible.

Insights

Lessons from Greenfields (IOW) Ltd v. Isle of Wight Council & Westridge Village Ltd

Posted on 13th May 2025 in Planning and Licensing

Posted by

Hanna Virta

Partner and Solicitor
Lessons from Greenfields (IOW) Ltd v. Isle of Wight Council & Westridge Village Ltd

In the recent case of Greenfields (IOW) Ltd v. Isle of Wight Council & Westridge Village Ltd, the Court of Appeal addressed significant procedural issues concerning the grant of planning permission. The case revolved around the Isle of Wight Council's failure to publish the draft or completed section 106 agreement on its planning register before issuing permission for a large housing development. This omission, contrary to Article 40(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, led to a legal challenge by the claimant, who argued that the lack of publication prevented public comment and caused prejudice.

Case Overview

The Isle of Wight Council's grant of planning permission for 473 homes was legally challenged due to non-compliance with Article 40(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. The Council failed to publish the draft or completed section 106 agreement on its planning register before issuing the permission, which the claimant argued prevented public comment and caused prejudice.

Court Findings

The Court ruled that the Council's failure to publish the section 106 agreement, in this case, invalidated the planning permission. It determined that merely publishing indicative heads of terms in an officer’s report did not amount to substantial compliance. The Court found that the claimant's reliance on the online planning register was reasonable, and that the omission caused clear prejudice even where the claimant had not requested a copy of the draft agreement from the Council.

Key Legal Reasoning

The Court emphasised the importance of Article 40(3) in allowing public scrutiny and comment on planning obligations. It applied established case law to conclude that the breach, in this case, rendered the decision invalid due to insufficient compliance by the Council and significant prejudice to the claimant, who was clearly interested in the outcome of the planning decision and the mitigation secured by the section 106 agreement.

Practical Implications

Local Authorities should strictly comply with Article 40(3) by publishing both draft and final section 106 agreements before granting planning permission. Relying solely on heads of terms in officer reports or publishing final agreements post-decision is no longer considered safe. Non-compliance may lead to planning decisions being quashed.

How Tozers Can Help

At Tozers, we understand the complexities of planning law. Our experienced team can help ensure compliance with all relevant legal requirements, including pre-grant publicity requirements. We can assist local authorities, landowners, developers, and other stakeholders in navigating the planning process effectively, minimising the risk of legal challenges and ensuring successful outcomes.

Contact our legal experts

Company & Industry

Related Insights

Insights

Abandonment of Existing Use of Property

Posted on 07th September 2023 in Planning and Licensing

In an appeal determined in August 2023 the Planning Inspector considered whether the use of a former Oast house had been abandoned. The appeal against the refusal to grant planning permission for the repair and reinstatement of the four kiln former Oast house was dismissed.

Posted by

Rachael Jones

Solicitor
Insights

What is Biodiversity Net Gain and how to achieve it?

Posted on 31st July 2023 in Rural Property & Countryside Matters, Planning and Licensing

Biodiversity Net Gain (“BNG”) in the context of planning and development is the principle that development of land should leave the natural environment of those sites in a measurably better state than they were prior to the development taking place.

Posted by

Jill Headford

Partner and Solicitor