AC-2024-LON-0001595 - [2025] EWHC 2182 (Admin)

In the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, it became apparent that many high-rise residential buildings around the country posed a danger as a result of deficiencies in their design and construction. As an emergency interim step to ensure that remediation of the most critically at-risk buildings was achieved swiftly, the Government made funding available for replacement of unsafe cladding on certain residential buildings via the BSF and similar schemes (“Funds”). However, it was considered not practicable to remediate all unsafe buildings in this way.

In light of these matters, the SoS wrote an open letter in January 2022, calling on developers to agree to fund or undertake at their own cost the remediation of unsafe buildings (referred to here as “self-remediation”). In March 2022, the SoS published a voluntary pledge letter (“Pledge”) by which developers could publicly commit to the principle of self-remediation. The Pledge was drafted with the input of the Home Builders Federation (“HBF”). Approximately 50 major developers were approached, including Rydon. Rydon did not respond to this invitation as it regarded the Pledge as directed at Britain’s “largest housebuilders” and, as a SME, it did not consider itself to be a large or major developer. Rydon is not a member of the HBF.

Between July 2022 and January 2023, the SoS engaged in negotiations with developers in the industry with a view to settling contractual terms to give binding effect to the Pledge principles. The SoS considered it desirable that a single set of terms be adopted. The negotiations were open to the developers at whom the Pledge was aimed and were largely mediated through HBF, which represented all developers’ interests and acted as a conduit for individual comments on the draft SRTs. Developers could also provide comments to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (“the Department”) directly. Whilst Rydon was contacted on a number of occasions, it considered the Department’s emails as little more that a “general distribution” from a government department and did not respond. The emails to Rydon included an invitation on 19 August 2022 to sign the Pledge, and an email dated 5 September 2022, inviting comments on the draft terms to be sent directly to the Department or via HBF, which was coordinating comments on behalf of Pledge signatories and other developers including those who were not members of HBF.

Negotiations about the SRTs concluded in January 2023 and the SRTs were opened for signature on 30 January 2023. The SoS made it clear that he expected developers to “sign the contract as soon as possible, and no later than Monday 13 March 2023…”

By an email dated 2 March 2023, the SoS sent developers (including Rydon) the final version of the Contract and the SRTs inviting them to submit mark-ups of the Contract setting out corporate details and buildings information. Rydon wrote to the Department on 10 March 2023 pointing out that Rydon Homes was a “small SME housebuilder”, and that it had understood that the Department would be focussing on large housebuilders / developers first and then rolling out its proposals to SME housebuilders at a later stage.

On 23 March 2023, Rydon wrote to the Department stating that:

“Rydon Homes had no involvement in [the Grenfell] refurbishment project, nor is it subject to the public inquiry or the police investigation. As such, Rydon Homes directors cannot approve a contract which includes provisions which may impact upon the company, for events not within its control. The provisions of Clause 7 and the definition of ‘Designated PD’ would need to be amended in that regard.” (Emphasis added)

By a response dated 28 March 2023, the SoS confirmed that the SRTs were in final form and would be identical for all signatories.

At a subsequent meeting between the Department and Rydon on 24 April 2023, Rydon expressed concern that it could “in theory already be deemed to be caught by the definition of Designated Participant Developer”. Ben Llewellyn for the Department confirmed that the terms could not be varied, and that the purpose of Clause 7 of the SRTs “was that if Rydon was deemed to be unfit to carry out remedial works following the outcome of the inquiry or a police investigation, then Ministers could not be seen to be allowing Rydon to carry out remedial works on resident buildings in these scenarios”: Rydon’s note of meeting. Rydon proposed a side-letter containing an agreement that would provide comfort around what was termed “the Grenfell clause” so that it was able to sign the Contract in its current form. Proposals for any such amendment or side-letter were rejected by the Department.