Court of Appeal
Rittson-Thomas and others v Oxfordshire County Council
[2019] EWCA Civ 200
2019 Feb 7; 21
Patten, Hamblen, Nicola Davies LJJ
TrustsResulting trustsSchool siteConveyance of land for use as school or otherwise for educational purposesSchool moved to adjacent site and vacant original site subsequently sold to property developerWhether vacant site used for educational purposes prior to saleWhether land reverting to claimants as grantor's successors in titleWhether claimants entitled to receive proceeds of sale School Sites Act 1841 (4 & 5 Vict c 38), s 2 Reverter of Sites Act 1987 (c 15), s 1

Land was conveyed to the local authority in September 1914 and April 1928 under section 2 of the School Sites Act 1841 for educational purposes as part of a public elementary school. In February 2006 the council relocated the school to a new site adjacent to the original premises and in September 2007 sold the land to a property developer for the purpose of applying those moneys towards the cost of building the new school pursuant to section 14 of the 1841 Act. The claimants, as successors in title to the grantor, asserted that the land had ceased to be used for educational purposes prior to the sale as required by section 2 of the Act, thereby triggering a reverter under that section, and that they were therefore entitled to the relevant proportion of the proceeds of sale under a statutory trust created by section 1 of the Reverter of Sites Act 1987. The judge held that the original site continued to be used for the purposes of the school within the meaning of section 14 because the authority intended to sell the land and use the sale proceeds on the new school buildings so as to prevent any reverter to the claimants under section 2.

On the claimants’ appeal—

Held, appeal allowed. The intention of the School Sites Act 1841 was to encourage the conveyance of land for the limited charitable educational purposes specified in section 2 of the Act, with the land reverting to the grantor should it no longer be used for one or more of those purposes. A sale of school land executed by a trustee under section 14 of the School Sites Act 1841 was exercisable even in the absence of an alternative site for purchase and where the sale of the original site was intended to finance the acquisition of a new site. The trustees of the land would still be selling the original site “for other land or building suitable to the purposes of their trust” and applying the proceeds of its sale “in the purchase of another site” within the meaning of section 14. However, the school had to remain in active use, including ancillary activities, consistent with its specified educational purposes under the Act immediately prior to the sale of land. If it did not, a reverter would be triggered under section 2, with the result that the legal estate in the land would be held by the trustees for the benefit of the grantor or his successors in title pursuant to section 1 of the Reverter of Sites Act 1987. In the present case, the sale of the original site post-dated the relocation of the school to the new site by more than 18 months. It remained vacant with no further possible use for educational purposes. The judge wrongly held that the site was being used for such purposes on the basis that it was being sold to partially reimburse the cost of the buildings for the new school. Accordingly, the legal title in the land reverted to the claimants (paras 11, 12, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25).

Dennis v Malcolm [1934] Ch 244 and Fraser v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance (No 2) [2006] 1 AC 377, HL(E) applied.

Decision of Richard Spearman QC sitting as a High Court judge [2018] EWHC 455 (Ch) reversed.

Matthew Smith (instructed by Lee Bolton Monier-Williams) for the claimants.

Nigel Thomas (instructed by Head of Law & Governance, Oxfordshire County Council, Oxford) for the defendant.

Scott McGlinchey, Barrister

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies