Judgment handed down in Crest Nicholson v Calvert

On 11 March 2026, judgment was handed down in Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd v Calvert.

Crest Nicholson entered into an option agreement over land near Crawley in 2002. Further land was added in 2006 and 2010. It was anticipated that it might take longer than 21 years to obtain planning permission and draw down all of the land, which was potentially problematic under the rule against perpetuities as it was in 2002. Consequently, the arrangements were structured in a way which, it was hoped, would enable Crest to take advantage of section 9(1) of the Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 1964, under which no perpetuity period was applicable to an option to acquire the reversion to a lease. Thus the agreement provided that, after 20 years, Crest had an option to take a “lease” of the remaining land, which “lease” was to contain an option to acquire the freehold. Crest exercised the lease option in 2023 but the landowners contended that the agreed form of documents did not constitute a lease, only a licence, and that section 9(1) of the 1964 Act did not apply. Consequently they contended that the option to acquire the freehold was void for perpetuity.

Mrs Justice Bacon held that the valid exercise of the lease option in 2023, after commencement of the Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 2009, had the effect of granting the freehold option in equity and that, as a consequence of the provisions of the 2009 Act, no perpetuity period applied to that grant. She agreed with the landowners that the contractual documentation only created a licence and not a lease, but in light of the 2009 Act that did not invalidate the freehold option.

Joanne Wicks KC, instructed by Paul Dunbar and Tess Geraghty from Winckworth Sherwood LLP, acted for the Claimant, Crest Nicholson.

Read the full judgment