A Collection is a selection of features, articles, comments and opinions on any given theme or topic. It allows you to stay up‑to‑date with what interests you most.
Login here to access your saved articles and followed authors.
We have sent you an email so you can reset your password.
Sorry, we had a problem.
Tags related to this article
Download PDF Print page
Published 1 octubre 2020
In the recent case of Norfolk Homes V North Norfolk DC [2020] the High Court sent a clear reminder to developers and planning professionals that Section 106 obligations attached to an earlier planning permission will not automatically bind a subsequent Section 73 consent granted to modify or remove planning conditions. The judge acknowledged that an original Section 106 agreement may be drafted in such a way as to create that legal relationship, but if such relevant provisions are absent in the agreement no such effect should be implied as a matter of interpretation. Whilst it is now common practice to include ‘future-proofing’ clauses within Section 106 agreements, they should not be assumed.
When making any application for modification of an existing planning permission, careful consideration should be given to whether and how any existing planning obligations will apply to the new scheme – at the risk of delaying determination of the application if the Section 106 agreement is an afterthought.
Please get in touch with the planning team if you need any advice on such matters.
London - Walbrook
+44 (0)20 7894 6193
By Ronan McLoughlin, Sinéad Hennessy, Rowena McCormack, Julie-Anne Binchy
By Crispin Tomlinson
By Lisa Skipp
By Sally Morris-Smith
By Elizabeth Coton
By Andrew Morgan
By Liz Donnelly
By Aleem Khan
By Christopher Stanwell, Simon Curran
By Mia Swift
By Nicola Fairbairn
By Gwyneth Barton
By Rosa-Maria Kane
By John Dunlop
By Clare Hartley, Richard Bell
By Clare Hartley, Luke Maidens, Kai Ricciardiello, Chloe Postlethwaite
