Residential development — Option to purchase land — Planning permission to be obtained — Price fixed on basis of grant of planning permission — Planning permission applied for but not granted — Defendants refusing to convey — Whether agreement void for uncertainty — Whether land sufficiently identified — Whether method of fixing price sufficiently established — Judgment for defendants
An agreement was entered into between the plaintiff and the defendants for an option to purchase two pieces of land at Lenside Nursery, Bearsted, near Maidstone, Kent, in 1985. The option agreement period was to last from February 22 1985 to February 22 1990. The agreement provided for a price of £60,000 per acre for all land for which the plaintiff obtained planning permission for residential development and £2,000 per acre for land which would be allocated by the planning authority for open space.
In September 1990 the first and second defendants sold the land to the third defendant. The plaintiff served a summons on all the defendants for exercise of the option and was ready to complete the transaction. The defendants refused on the grounds, inter alia, that the agreement was void for uncertainty in that it did not adequately identify the land in respect of which the option was purportedly granted and in that it did not specify that part of the two titles to which the agreement applied. In addition, the mechanism for fixing the price was dependent upon and presupposed the grant of planning permission for residential development and such planning permission had not been granted. The plaintiff contended that the land was adequately identified and further, was clearly defined on inspection. Further, the contract plans had been approved by the first and second defendants and the option agreement had been registered.
