![AC-2024-LON-001877 - [2025] EWHC 2132 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png){kind=logo}
Ground 3 – excessive use of compulsory purchase powers
Ground 3 – excessive use of compulsory purchase powers
The issue
The issue under this ground is whether the inspector failed to understand and thereby misdirected himself as to the Claimant’s argument that compulsory purchase of the Premises was an excessive use of the Second Defendant’s power under section 226(1)(a) of the 1990 Act. It is also in issue whether the inspector gave proper, adequate and intelligible reasons for rejecting that argument.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Ground of challenge
- The inspector’s decision letter
- Legal and policy framework
- Ground 1 – Viability
- The CPO Guidance
- Funding and delivery arrangements – the Second Defendant’s case
- Funding and delivery arrangements – the Second Defendant’s evidence
- The March report
- Overview and scrutiny process
- The Claimant’s case on viability and funding
- The parties’ closing submissions
- The inspector’s conclusions
- Submissions
- Discussion
- Ground 2 – Reasonable efforts to acquire by agreement
- The CPO Guidance
- The factual background
- Revised draft agreement and uplift offer
- March 2023 discussions and correspondence
- The Claimant’s objection
- The Second Defendant’s response
- Evidence at the public inquiry
- Closing submissions
- The inspector’s decision
- Submissions
- Discussion
- Ground 3 – excessive use of compulsory purchase powers
- CPO Guidance
- The parties’ contentions
- The inspector’s decision
- Submissions
- Discussion
- Conclusions