Skip to main content
01753 876 800

The CPO and the Choice of Two Competing Developers

In a recent case (Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Wolverhampton City Council and Tesco Stores Ltd) the Court of Appeal dismissed Sainsbury’s challenge to the Council’s resolution to make a compulsory purchase order in favour of Tesco’s competing scheme.

The case is interesting in that the Court held that the Council could take into account cross-subsidies being provided by each scheme.

In this case each supermarket had obtained an outline planning permission to develop the same site. The Council resolved to make a CPO in favour of Tesco’s scheme. The Council preferred that scheme as it provided a cross-subsidy for the development of another site in the area. The Court of Appeal agreed that the Council was entitled and in fact was required to consider the proposed cross-subsidy as it provided a “wider benefit”.

Related Articles

Too poor to play?

Insights

In recent press reports, developers have been accused of separating social housing tenants from wealthier home owners by preventing them from using play areas.

View More News

Get in touch

Senate House, 62–70 Bath Road,
Slough, Berkshire, SL1 3SR

We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website.