Leicestershire wins long-running parish hall dispute with community group

Leicestershire County Council (LCC) has won a High Court victory in the long-running claim brought by a community association over the use of a school hall, potentially saving the local authority up to £6m in legal costs.

The action was brought against the council and the governors of St Hardulph's CofE Primary School by Breedon-on-the-Hill Community Association (BOTHCA), following an attempt to charge the community association to pay for the use of the school's hall. BOTHCA had part-funded the construction of the hall in the 1960s and claimed that, in return, it had been promised the use of the hall without charge. The school governors and the council claimed that the arrangement did allow it to make a charge for use of the premises on a non-profit basis.

Following some years of fractious relations between the school and BOTHCA, in 2007, the governors gave BOTHCA a year's notice to terminate the agreement between the school and BOTHCA, prompting the community group to launch a judicial review on both public and private law grounds.

The council withdrew its notice to quit to BOTHCA in 2009, and offered four alternative options to enable the group to continue to use the school hall which had the effect of nullifying the public law aspects of the claim.

BOTHCA, however, rejected all four the alternative options offered by the council and came up with its own plan instead, which would have required a greater subsidy from the council than the council's proposals. A public consultation found support for this alternative plan; however the council subsequently took the decision to reject this plan and offer an alternative which involved letting the premises to the group in return for a peppercorn rent and a contribution to their running costs and a payment of at least £92,000 to BOTHCA to reflect its the original contribution to the hall's construction. At the same time, it stated that a 12-month termination notice would be served on BOTHCA if the group failed to reach a compromise through mediation within a defined period.

In a decision published last Friday (11 June), the judge in the Chancery Division of the High Court, Mr Justice Sales, ruled that in the absence of a legally-binding contract, the original agreements between the school and BOTHCA in 1958 and 1962 did allow the school to charge for use of the facilities.

The judge also ruled that the council's cabinet was “rational” in its acceptance of the advice from its Director of Children and Young People's Services that the community group's proposals should be rejected on the grounds that it would make the school “unviable” and that the proposed introduction of CRB checks for BOTHCA members by the school was consistent with council policy across all of its schools and was not intended to create the impression that BOTHCA 's “use and enjoyment of the premises was more problematic than was in fact the case”.

Finally, Mr Justice Sales also ruled that there was no breach of trust on the council's part and that it was entitled to take the potential cost of continuing negotaiations into account when taking the final decision to issue a termination notice to BOTHCA.

Some reporting of the case speculated that the council was fighting the case unnecessarily and that the costs of running the case had far exceeded the value of the matter at hand. However, the judgment suggested that it was the plaintiffs, rather than the council, that were primarily responsible for prolonging the case. Costs have yet to be assigned, but the tone of the judgement would indicate that most if not all of the costs will be awarded against BOTHCA, which is believed to be covered by an 'After the event' insurance policy and whose solicitors have been working on a conditional fee arrangement.

Mr Justice Sales said that it was “regrettable” that the parties had failed to reach an agreement. Later in his judgment, he noted that “LCC officials dealing with the matter...did their level best against this background of considerable uncertainty, for which they were not responsible, to respond to exaggerated claims by Mrs Dore and BOTHCA regarding LCC's obligations in a measured and fair way. As the advice regarding the legal position developed over time, they responded appropriately to the new circumstances. Further, throughout their involvement, whatever the legal advice and understanding of the legal position might be, they did, in fact, have full regard to the desirability of community groups being able to make use of the premises along with the school and actively sought to encourage such use.”

BOTHCA has indicated that it will apply for leave to appeal against the decision.

A copy of the full judgment is available by clicking here.