Don't show this message again

We have placed cookies on your computer to help make this website better. You can view our cookie policy or find out more about cookies by visiting www.aboutcookies.org or www.allaboutcookies.org. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.

Community Infrastructure Levy - Surcharge Quashed

Simon Dimmick

Simon Dimmick, Partner in our Planning & Environmental Law team, explains an appeal of the Community Infrastructure Levy ("CIL") Regulations 2010, resulting in a surcharge being quashed.

The Collecting Authority had issued a surcharge to the Appellant of £2,500.00 for failing to submit a Commencement Notice prior to starting the development. The Appellant appealed under Regulation 177(1)(b) of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) claiming that the Collecting Authority had failed to serve a liability notice in respect of the development. Therefore the surcharge (which related to that development) should be quashed. 

The Collecting Authority had served the liability notice on the Appellant’s architects on 26 October 2016 but not the Appellant. 

Regulation 65 states that a liability notice must be served on the “relevant person”, any person who has assumed liability for CIL and the owner of the relevant land. Under this regulation the relevant person essentially means the person who applied for planning permission or who submitted notice of chargeable development. 

The Inspector acknowledged that it was reasonable for the Collecting Authority to have served the liability notice on the Appellant’s architects. However, the Regulations are clear in that they must be served on both the relevant person and the owner of the land. On the evidence before the Inspector it was clear that “the Council failed to do this”. 

The Collecting Authority had argued that correspondence with the Appellant (including an application for self-build exemption and the Council’s website) indicated that the Appellant was aware of its requirement to submit a commencement notice. However, procedurally the Council had missed a step and therefore the Inspector had to allow the appeal and quash the surcharge.

For more information, please contact a member of our Planning and Environmental Law team.

This blog article was produced with support from Kayleigh Chapman.

This article is intended for the use of clients and other interested parties. The information contained in it is believed to be correct at the date of publication, but it is necessarily of a brief and general nature and should not be relied upon as a substitute for specific professional advice.