Southwark Concede Planning Decision was Unlawful

Decision to grant Leathermarket Community Benefit Society planning permission on Elim Estate has been quashed.

Guest blog from Elim Estate Campaigners.

Elim Save our Space (x.com)

Earlier this week, Southwark Council conceded that its decision to grant planning permission for the controversial Elim Estate infill development breached national planning policy and was unlawful.

In a case brought by Alexandra Goldenberg and Saskia O’Hara at PILC, a plan for infill development has been quashed by High Court order due to Southwark Council’s failure to enforce national flood risk policy. In the order, High Court judge Sir Peter Lane stated “did not need to consider the other grounds of challenge”–which included issues of inadequate consultation, financial feasibility, equality duties, overshadowing, and loss of green and social amenities–as the Defendant (Southwark Council) had already conceded on the flood risk ground.

The High Court order vindicates years of resistance to what residents saw as a deeply flawed and damaging scheme. This is the second failed planning application for the Elim council estate. A previous application was withdrawn in 2021 following a local campaign to save the outdoor ballcourt on the site.

A Pattern of Failure and Ignoring the Community

This latest chapter exposes systemic failings in how Southwark Council, its delegated tenant managed development organisation Leathermarket Community Benefit Society (CBS), and ward councillors including Cllr Helen Dennis have handled plans to build on the Elim estate.

For years, residents and legal advice services raised serious concerns about the mismanaged planning application. Despite repeatedly highlighting key procedural failures—including a lack of a flood risk assessment, inadequate consultation, missing equalities impact assessments, and the loss of green and social amenities—concerns were consistently ignored and marginalised by Southwark Council and CBS, leaving residents feeling frustrated and sidelined. Campaigners argue that had the community been properly engaged, social housing could already have been built on part of the site, balancing the need for new homes with the protection of existing community spaces and amenities.

In the order, the Judge noted that Leathermarket CBS had failed to sign the consent agreement between Southwark Council and PILC, thereby accepting neither the terms nor the quashing of planning permission. This is being seen as a further snub to engaging in due process on behalf of the community Leathermarket Community Benefit Society claims to serve. Campaigners are calling for urgent systemic changes to resolve the toxic relationship Leathermarket CBS has created with residents and the wider community.

In 2021 whistleblower Robert Hutchinson was targeted by Leathermarket CBS in an apparent attempt to intimidate local campaigners. Hutchinson, who was falsely accused of internet hacking by CBS and faced arrest as a result, says: “This poor-quality development should never have been imposed on the community, and should never have been passed at planning committee. How have over a million pounds of public funds been wasted on this failed scheme—not to mention the costs of other unbuilt projects? By working with instead of against the local community, a less damaging solution could have been supported by residents and built, with families living in much needed accommodation now.”

The Future of Infill in Southwark

With yet another planning failure, campaigners are asking whether this marks the end of Southwark’s controversial infill programme. The quashed Elim Estate development was initially supported by a £5 million grant from the Greater London Authority (GLA)—money withdrawn late-on in the mismanaged process.

For over five years residents and campaigners have questioned Southwark Council’s oversight of developer Leathermarket CBS, raising serious concerns about its governance, financial management, competence, and accountability. These concerns, which remain unanswered, have deepened following the organisation’s repeated failure to secure planning approval for the proposed development on Elim Estate.

Elim Estate resident Daniel Kanu says: “Residents are very happy that the existing ball court has been saved. It’s an important shared space where children of all races play safely, creating community togetherness and helping keep crime off the streets.”

Fola Ogunkola adds: “On behalf of the Decima Street TRA I would like to say how delighted we are that the planning permission has been ruled unlawful. Our TRA as well as local residents we’ve spoken to are thrilled and happy about the news. Residents are now looking forward to the future and working to improve Elim Estate. We hope that there have been massive learnings from what has happened and that we can move forward positively as a community.”

Campaigners remain committed to ensuring future developments respect both existing residents’ needs and the demand for genuinely affordable housing.