Agreements under the planning acts remained subject to the general law requiring formalities for contracts for the sale of land. Where two landowners had an understanding as to the expectations for the division of responsibility for provision of affordable housing between their respective plots, one could not be obliged to continue where the contract was incomplete. A planning agreement allowed one party to require the other to sell land to a nominated beneficiary at a discounted price. This amounted to a contract to sell the land, and so, in order to be enforceable, it had to be signed by all the parties. It was permissible to blue pencil certain parts of the agreement relating to this aspect and leave the rest enforceable.
Court: ChDDate: 30-Jun-1999
Judges: Mr David Mackie QC
Statutes: Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 1
Links: Times, Gazette,
References: [1999] 39 EG 149,
Cases Cited:
- McCausland and Another -v- Duncan Lawrie Ltd and Another, CA, Cited, (Times 18-Jun-96, Gazette 10-Jul-96, [1996] 4 All ER 995, [1997] 1 WLR 38)
Cited By:
- Nweze and Another -v- Nwoko, CA, Distinguished, (Bailii, [2004] EWCA Civ 379, Times 06-May-04, [2004] 2 P&CR 33)
- Jelson Ltd -v- Derbyshire County Council, , Appeal from, ([1999] 3 EGLR 91, (2000) JPL 203)