
Community Infrastructure Levy: How to ensure that you can split payments
The recent case of The Queen on the application of Oval Estates (St Peter’s) Ltd and Bath & North East Somerset Council [2020] EWHC 457 (Admin) saw the High Court reject Oval Estates’ bid to avoid paying an entire CIL bill for a phased housing scheme in one go.
Phased payments under CIL Regulations
The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (the Regulations) prescribe the time when CIL is payable to a Charging Authority. The regulations state that CIL is payable on “Chargeable Developments” which are developments for which planning permission has been granted (Regulation 9). Crucially, if the development is constructed in one go then the CIL charge is payable on the whole of the development from the commencement of the chargeable development (Regulation 7). In contrast, if the development is phased, each phase constitutes a separate chargeable event. Developers should be aware that a phased planning permission is defined as one “which expressly provides for development to be carried out in phases” (Regulation 2(1)).
Background of Oval Estates case
Oval Estates attempted to avoid paying CIL in one payment alleging their development of 81 residential dwellings in Somerset was a phased development. Oval’s argument was that they should only pay Bath and North East Somerset Council (“the Council”) CIL for the phases of development that had commenced.
Oval Estates were granted outline planning permission in March 2016 and in submitting their reserved matters application included a “proposed plan” that signalled the development would be constructed in three phases. Oval Estates obtained a non-material amendment (NMA) on 8 February 2019 to include a new plan in the Plans List to the 2016 permission. This indicated that the development would be in three phases. The Council maintained for the purposes of CIL that the development was not a phased development. Correspondence between the parties revealed Oval Estates assumed liability for CIL and they had submitted a Commencement Notice which indicated that development would commence on 15 October 2018.
Oval Estates argued that the 2016 planning permission, when read alongside the Section 106 Agreement, was a phased planning permission. Additionally, the “proposed plan” and NMA supported their stance. The Court held that there was nothing within the Section 106 Agreement implying the Development was phased. The Court also held while Oval Estates had signalled their intention to phase the development the description of the “proposed plan” indicated that the plan was not in agreed form, nor was it an indication that the 2016 planning permission was a phased planning permission.
Oval Estates sought to persuade the Court that their liability was modified by the NMA as the decision in effect made the 2016 planning permission a phased development. The Court emphasised that while Regulation 9(7) allows for the chargeable development date to be modified by minor material changes (s73 applications) the Regulations did not contain special rules in determining the chargeable development date where non-material amendments have been made.
Oval submitted that the material date for determining liability was the date the Liability Notice was issued to them, instead of the date on which “commencement of the chargeable development occurs” (Regulation 31(3)). The Court rejected this argument ruling the Liability Notice played no part in determining the liability date. The Court stressed the Notices served under the Regulations were influential in confirming when liability arose with the Commencement Notice affirming this was 15 October 2018.
The Court’s decision
The Court unanimously dismissed Oval Estates’ arguments and applied the Regulations rigidly. It was held liability to pay CIL arises on commencement of the chargeable development, which the Commencement Notice confirmed was 15 October 2018. Oval Estates were liable to pay the Council the sum of £874,283.78 in one payment.
What should developers take from Oval Estates?
The Court will apply the CIL Regulations strictly when a dispute arises.
When submitting planning applications, developers should make it clear to local planning authorities that the proposed development is to be phased. Supporting documents, e.g. plans and Section 106 Agreements, should be in agreed form and clearly set out the developer’s intention to phase the development. These should be incorporated into the planning permission at the outset.
TLT has significant experience of assisting developers at all stages of their development, including CIL. If you would like assistance, please contact us.
This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at March 2020. Specific advice should be sought for specific cases. For more information see our terms & conditions
Get in touch
Get in touch
Insights & events

Infrastructure Planning Blog 45: Largest solar DCO granted and other news

Infrastructure Planning Blog 44: Plans, purdah and publication

Infrastructure Planning Blog 43: Slow, slow, quick, no go for infrastructure planning

Infrastructure Planning Blog 42: Nuclear reforms, discharge of requirements and NPPF changes

Infrastructure Planning Blog 41: New Welsh guidance, the use of AI in planning and other updates

Northern Ireland Planning and Environment update: Minerals

Infrastructure Planning Blog 40: A conference and another revocation

Infrastructure consent order regime in Wales: Updates

Infrastructure Planning Blog 39: Fenwick Solar Farm, Sizewell C and EIA case law

Infrastructure Planning Blog 38: A new wind DCO, and European streamlining

Infrastructure Planning Blog 37: Fission 'n' chippy

Infrastructure Planning Blog 36: Application Fees, the Holocaust Memorial, data centres and correction orders

Infrastructure Planning Blog 35: Water, electricity markets, delays

Infrastructure Planning Blog 34: Data centres can be NSIPs after a record DCO year

Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025: What developers need to know

Impact of flexible working on towns and cities - the market and legal considerations
1 September – all change (again) for the Community Infrastructure Levy

TLT adds 29 lawyers creating one of the largest practices of its kind in the UK

TLT hires transport and renewable energy specialist supporting the expansion of its planning team
TLT Partner Appointed Chair of North West Fraud Forum | TLT

TLT Shortlisted for Firm of the Year at Scottish Legal Awards | TLT

TLT Wins Law Firm of the Year at Manchester Legal Awards | TLT

TLT Recognised for Two Awards at The Lawyer Awards 2022 | TLT

TLT Shortlisted for Two Manchester Legal Awards 2022 | TLT

TLT advises Network Homes on £140m sale to Grainger

TLT advises One Housing Group on major affordable housing project

TLT appointed to sports and arts legal services panel

TLT supports Network Homes with affordable housing acquisition

TLT advises Blackfinch on acquisition of two wind energy sites

TLT supports Low Carbon develop UK's largest community-owned solar park

TLT wins expanded role on North West Legal Consortium panel
TLT advises Guinness Asset Management on sale of clean technology assets

TLT advises Alpha Real Renewables on clean energy asset acquisition

Biodiversity Net Gain: What’s changing and what it means for you

BNG - TLT and Belmont Estate talk nature positivity




%20%C3%94%C3%87%C3%B4%20790px%20X%20451px%2072ppi2.avif)




%20%C3%94%C3%87%C3%B4%20790px%20X%20451px%2072ppi.avif)



%20%C3%94%C3%87%C3%B4%20790px%20X%20451px%2072ppi2.avif)








