Rittson-Thomas & Ors v Oxfordshire County Council

Under a conveyance made pursuant to section 2 of the School Sites Act 1841, the statutory purposes selected in the grant determine how long the grant lasts. Reverter occurs automatically when the land ceases to be actively used for those purposes. The section 14 power may accommodate the prior acquisition of replacement premises and later reimbursement from sale proceeds, but it must be exercised before the original site ceases to be used. A vacant site held for sale does not remain in educational use merely because the proceeds are intended to fund a replacement school. A broad and practical approach to cesser of use does not dispense with active use of the land.

The claimants, successors to the grantor, sought declarations concerning land conveyed to Oxfordshire County Council in 1914 and 1928 under the School Sites Act 1841. The school moved from the original site to new premises in February 2006, and the old site was sold in September 2007. The claimants argued that the move caused a statutory reverter and that part of the sale proceeds was held on trust for them.

The Deputy Judge, Mr Richard Spearman QC, held that the section 14 power of sale was operable as part of a composite scheme and that the land continued to be used for the purposes of the school: [2018] EWHC 455 (Ch). The central issue on appeal was whether the old site had ceased to be used for the statutory purposes before the sale.

The appeal was allowed unanimously. Patten LJ gave the leading judgment, with Hamblen LJ and Nicola Davies LJ agreeing.

1. Under section 2 of the School Sites Act 1841, the statutory purposes selected in the conveyance determine the duration of the grant. If the land ceases to be used for those purposes, reverter occurs automatically. The Reverter of Sites Act 1987 changes the legal consequences of reverter by substituting a statutory trust, but does not alter the event which triggers it.
2. Section 14 of the 1841 Act can accommodate the acquisition of a replacement site, or expenditure on replacement premises, before the original site is sold. Sale proceeds may reimburse that earlier expenditure. However, the power must be exercised before the original land ceases to be used for the statutory purposes. A sale after cesser cannot prevent or cure the reverter.
3. The broad and practical approach discussed in Fraser v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance (No 2) [2006] 1 AC 377 concerns whether land has ceased to be used for the statutory purposes. It does not permit a continuing intention to sell vacant land and apply the proceeds to replacement premises to count as educational use.
4. The old site became vacant when the school moved in 2006. It was not being actively used as a school site or for educational purposes. Ancillary uses, such as a playground or dining facilities, could qualify, but no such use continued here. Reverter therefore occurred before the 2007 sale, and the appeal was allowed.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division) — allowed the appeal, holding that the original school site had ceased to be used for the statutory purposes before its sale: [2019] EWCA Civ 200.
• High Court of Justice, Chancery Division — held that the section 14 power of sale operated as part of a composite scheme and prevented a statutory trust arising: [2018] EWHC 455 (Ch).