Oxfordshire County Council faces a potential multi-million-pound compensation claim stemming from legal counsel received regarding an established quarrying operation in Radley.
The authority has obtained additional independent legal guidance concerning H Tuckwell and Sons’ Thrupp Farm quarrying activities.
The company, which produces ready-mixed concrete and construction aggregates, has not submitted plans for constructing a fresh quarry.
Instead, the enterprise requested that the council establish contemporary conditions governing continued sand and gravel extraction at Thrupp Farm pursuant to historic permissions.
According to documentation prepared for the county council’s planning committee, the local authority does not possess the necessary jurisdiction to determine the application.
London-based barrister David Forsdick KC advised the council that legislation prevents reviving permissions once paragraph 7 is triggered.
This assessment aligns with pertinent case law, statutory objectives, applicable terminology, and the statutory framework’s internal coherence.
However, certain factual matters warrant seeking the applicant’s commentary before finalising the position.
Additionally, given the council’s altered stance since the prior committee report on this pivotal issue, the applicant should review both this opinion and the separate assessment provided by another senior counsel.
Practically, the legal position indicates that historical permissions became void following the 2016 cutoff date and cannot be reinstated.
Should the planning committee conclude it possesses no jurisdiction, the quarry operator’s avenue lies in an appeal to the Secretary of State.
A Planning Inspector would initially address the jurisdictional question and, if upheld, proceed to evaluate the substantive merits.
Conversely, if the council approved the application yet imposed conditions that would restrict operational rights and cause unjustified harm, officers contend the authority would incur compensation obligations estimated between £6 million and £8 million.
The council’s planning development manager David Periam stated in a report that no budgetary provision or reserved funds currently exist to address such an obligation.
Furthermore, the authority’s insurance arrangements do not encompass this particular liability.
Consequently, any expenditure would draw from general council reserves, potentially compromising the ability to maintain a balanced budget.
The financial exposure risk therefore demands thorough evaluation.
The council’s existing legal advice concludes that because the submission arrived after the 2016 deadline, officers cannot lawfully establish the requested conditions.
By asserting it lacks the authority to determine the matter, the council circumvents immediate activation of the compensation liability.
The submission and accompanying legal advice will undergo examination at a planning meeting scheduled for Monday, 21 September.