Anixter Limited v Secretary of State for Transport

A statutory period requiring a counter-notice to be served within 28 days is inflexible where the statutory language, purpose and scheme show that Parliament intended certainty. A late counter-notice is ineffective, and an acquiring authority’s reference of it to the Tribunal does not confer jurisdiction or prevent either party from challenging its validity.

For a general vesting declaration, a requirement that the owner first had knowledge requires actual knowledge. Service of an unopened notice does not itself impute knowledge where the statute contains no deemed-knowledge formula. A statutory continuation of a business tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is not an option to renew for the definition of a long tenancy about to expire.

The Secretary of State served a notice to treat for one of the claimant’s business premises and, as a precaution, notice of a general vesting declaration. The claimant served counter-notices requiring acquisition of its remaining premises, but the counter-notice to the notice to treat was received three days after the 28-day period.

The acquiring authority referred both counter-notices to the Tribunal while maintaining that they were ineffective. The Tribunal determined preliminary issues concerning the date on which the claimant acquired knowledge of the general vesting declaration, whether that procedure applied to the claimant’s tenancy, and whether it could entertain a late counter-notice under the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965.

1. Reference dismissed. The counter-notice responding to the notice to treat was served out of time. The Tribunal had no power to extend the 28-day period and the acquiring authority’s conditional reference did not cure the defect.

2. For paragraph 3 of Schedule A1 to the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981, the claimant first had knowledge of the general vesting declaration when its responsible employee opened the notice on 20 December 2017. Service and knowledge are distinct concepts. Unlike section 10(3), paragraph 3 contains no language deeming knowledge or extending it to what a recipient could reasonably have been expected to know.

3. That conclusion did not assist the claimant because its tenancy was a long tenancy about to expire and was excluded from the general vesting declaration procedure. The period remaining was the unexpired contractual term. Statutory continuation under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 was neither a contractual option nor a renewal of the tenancy for section 2(2) of the 1981 Act.

4. Applying ordinary statutory interpretation, the 28-day limit in paragraph 5 of Schedule 2A to the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 was intended to be mandatory in effect. The simple step required, the absence of any dispensing power, and the need for certainty before the authority must make consequential decisions all supported that construction. The statutory compensation rights materially mitigated the effect of losing the right to require acquisition of the whole holding.

5. In Part 3 of Schedule 2A, a reference to a counter-notice means one served in accordance with the earlier requirements. The Tribunal may determine whether its jurisdiction has been properly engaged, including where the authority referred the document expressly subject to its objection that it was late.

not stated in the judgment.