Rittson-Thomas & Ors v Oxfordshire County Council [2021] UKSC 13

Oxfordshire County Council relocated Nettlebed School to adjacent premises, then sold the original site donated under the School Sites Act 1841. The Supreme Court held that section 14 permitted sale with vacant possession after relocation, provided the proceeds were intended for the new school. No statutory reverter arose.

Facts

In 1914 and 1928, Robert Fleming conveyed land in Nettlebed to Oxfordshire County Council under the School Sites Act 1841 for use as a school site. The school operated on this ‘Fleming site’ until February 2006, when pupils moved to a new building on adjacent council-owned land. The County Council’s documented plan was to sell the Fleming site to pay off costs of the new school building. In September 2007, almost all of the Fleming site was sold to a property developer for £1,243,819.50.

The Dispute

Four heirs of Mr Fleming claimed that when the school moved in February 2006, the statutory charitable trust ended and a reverter arose under section 2 of the 1841 Act. They argued the sale proceeds should be transferred to them. The County Council contended section 14 of the 1841 Act permitted the sale and use of proceeds for the new school building without triggering reverter.

Issues

The central issue was whether, under sections 2 and 14 of the School Sites Act 1841, the trustees could sell the original site with vacant possession after the school had moved to a new site and apply the proceeds to pay costs of the new premises, or whether the statutory reverter was triggered when the school ceased operating on the original site.

Judgment

The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal, reversing the Court of Appeal’s decision. Lady Arden and Lord Burrows delivered the joint leading judgment (with which Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Sales and Lord Stephens agreed).

Interpretation of Sections 2 and 14

The Court emphasised that following Fraser v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance (No 2) [2005] UKHL 65, a broad and practical approach must be taken to interpreting the 1841 Act. Lord Walker’s words in that case were cited:

All these considerations suggest that the court should take a broad and practical approach to the question whether a school has (in the words of the third proviso) ceased to be used for the purposes in this Act mentioned.

The Court held that sections 2 and 14 must be read as a coherent whole and interpreted purposively to further the Act’s educational purposes. The charitable trust framework meant courts should lean towards continuation of the trust rather than finding reverter.

Application to the Facts

The Court found that the Fleming site did not cease to be used for the purposes of the Act when the school moved in February 2006. Section 14 permitted sale with vacant possession where, at all material times, there was an intention to apply proceeds in the improvement of other premises used or to be used for the school. The documented plan throughout was to use sale proceeds for the new school building.

The site of a school does not cease to be used for the purposes of the 1841 Act (section 2) where at all material times it is considered advisable to sell the site and, with the consent of the managers and directors of the school, if any, to apply the money arising from the sale in the purchase of another site, or in the improvement of other premises, used or to be used for the school (section 14).

The Court rejected arguments that reverter must be triggered by an objectively identifiable event independent of trustees’ intentions, noting that even permanent closure of a school depends on intentions, as illustrated in In re Chavasse.

Implications

This decision clarifies that under the School Sites Act 1841, trustees may sell donated school sites with vacant possession after relocating schools to new premises, provided the intention to apply proceeds to the new school exists at material times. The ruling prevents the need for potentially educationally disruptive or financially disadvantageous arrangements such as staggered moves or conditional sales. It confirms the balance between donors’ interests and the public interest in education favours continuation of the charitable educational purpose rather than technical reverter.The decision is significant for local education authorities holding land under the 1841 Act and for potential claimants to reverter rights.

Verdict: Appeal allowed. The Supreme Court held that Oxfordshire County Council was entitled to sell the Fleming site and apply the proceeds to the new school building without triggering a statutory reverter under section 2 of the School Sites Act 1841.

Source: Rittson-Thomas & Ors v Oxfordshire County Council [2021] UKSC 13