• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

Is section 73B the answer to Hillside?

A recent government consultation proposes that the new section 73B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 can provide a solution to the issues created by overlapping, incompatible planning permissions. 

Case law confirms that:

  • Where there are two overlapping permissions which are materially inconsistent, should the carrying out of Permission B make it physically impossible to carry out the rest of Permission A, then it is unlawful to carry out further development under Permission A (known as the Pilkington principle).
  • When considering whether development under Permission B would make it physically impossible to comply with Permission A, you have to consider the whole site of Permission A unless Permission A was granted on a severable basis (per the Supreme Court decision in Hillside).

This casts doubt on the ability to rely on “drop in” permissions with the intention of providing for alternate development in a small part of a large scheme that is already being implemented.

  • A permission will only be severable if this is expressly clear on the face of it. 
  • These principles apply to both outline and full permissions (per Dennis).

This leaves developers in a difficult position where there are overlapping permissions which were not granted on a severable basis. The Supreme Court in Hillside suggested that the route forward would be to apply for a new permission for the entire site. However, this comes with inherent difficulties (not least: increased planning application fees, the need to adapt to evolved planning policies for any new application and potential CIL implications). 

The government is consulting on the extent to which section 73B could help address these issues. S73B (which was introduced by the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023 but is not yet in force) will facilitate changes to a permission (to the description of development and/or conditions) where the effect of the variation permission would not be “substantially different” from that of the existing permission.  The authority is limited to considering the merits of the variation under section 73B. The government sees this as a potential solution, on the basis that, in many cases, changes will not take the proposed development beyond the original masterplan and therefore are not “substantially different”. 

However, there is no definition or test for what is “substantially different” and it will be a matter of planning judgement. The government is unwilling to provide prescriptive guidance, but experience of section 73 applications would suggest that general guidance or examples as to the scope of permissible changes would be helpful.

The consultation does acknowledge that section 73B may not address all circumstances and the government is therefore seeking views on alternative options to manage the operation of overlapping permissions – for example via a new general development order which would deal with overlapping permissions in prescribed circumstances (such as for a specific class of development). 

For now, developers must take care when implementing overlapping and inconsistent permissions to avoid invalidating any future development under the original permission that may have taken years to obtain. The solution to addressing those matters must be considered carefully on a case-by-case basis.

The consultation closes on 1 May 2024.

the government wants to ensure there are “effective, proportionate and transparent routes to manage post-permission changes to development”

Our thinking

  • Rivals: Filming Locations and Considerations for Landed Estates

    Naomi Nettleton

    Insights

  • Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024: provisions removing two-year qualifying criteria for certain lease extensions and freehold purchases in force

    Laura Bushaway

    Quick Reads

  • Building Safety: What’s in store for 2025?

    Michael O'Connor

    Insights

  • The Law Society Gazette quotes Claire Fallows on planning law reform

    Claire Fallows

    In the Press

  • Devolution White Paper: A Brief Update for Infrastructure and Development Practitioners

    Kevin Gibbs

    Insights

  • VAT Zero-rating: Dwellings or RRP – which is best for student accommodation?

    Elizabeth Hughes

    Insights

  • Further protection may mean further complications for development in Protected Landscapes

    Sophie Willis

    Quick Reads

  • The UK’s Clean Power 2030 Action Plan

    Rachael Davidson

    Insights

  • Great British Energy: Planning for a Greener Britain

    Charlotte Inglis

    Insights

  • Proposed changes to the Aarhus Convention

    Titilope Hassan

    Insights

  • Doing away with EIA? A brief summary of the Government’s planning reform working paper in relation to Development and Nature Recovery

    Sophie Willis

    Insights

  • Charles Russell Speechlys bolsters Real Estate and Construction offering with Senior Consultant hire

    Kevin Gibbs

    News

  • Consultation on further changes to compulsory purchase process and compensation: making compulsory acquisition easier

    Claire Fallows

    Insights

  • Revised NPPF – the Green Belt, Grey Belt and the Golden Rules

    Titilope Hassan

    Quick Reads

  • Key Planning Decisions in 2024

    Sophie Willis

    Insights

  • SGL 1’s building blocks to interpreting rights of first refusal under the 1987 Act

    Lauren Fraser

    Insights

  • Legal developments set to shape the UK’s Real Estate sector in 2025

    Sarah Morley

    Insights

  • Planning law changes will be a key theme for strategic land and regeneration in 2025

    Suzi Gatward

    Insights

  • 2025 will see a significant legal disruptor to the Living Sector

    Francis Ho

    Insights

  • Private capital; ESG and diversification: Trends in M&A and Investing in the UK Hotels Sector 2025

    James Broadhurst

    Insights

Back to top