How to Object to a Compulsory Purchase Order – Strategy, Grounds and Evidence That Matter

When a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) is proposed, affected landowners and occupiers often assume the process is automatic and unavoidable. In reality, there is a formal and structured right to object, and well-prepared objections can influence outcomes, scope, compensation, and on occasion whether the scheme proceeds at all.

This article focuses on how objections work in practice, what decision-makers actually consider, and how professional evidence can materially strengthen your position.

Understanding What You Are Objecting To

A CPO is not a single decision but a process, usually promoted by a public authority or statutory undertaker to assemble land needed for a scheme said to be in the public interest.

Objections are not about whether you “like” the scheme. They must be directed at whether the legal tests for compulsory purchase have been met, including:

  • Is the scheme genuinely in the public interest?

  • Is there a compelling case for the acquisition of your land?

  • Has the acquiring authority demonstrated necessity, proportionality and deliverability?

The confirming authority-often the Secretary of State, advised by the Planning Inspectorate -must be satisfied on these points before a CPO can be confirmed.

 

Who Can Object to a CPO?

You may submit an objection if you are:

  • A freehold or leasehold owner

  • A business tenant or occupier

  • A party with private rights (easements, access, restrictive covenants)

  • In some cases, a mortgagee or long-term interest holder

Importantly, you do not need to object alone. Coordinated objections supported by valuation, planning, or technical evidence often carry greater weight.

 

Common Grounds of Objection That Carry Weight

Not all objections are equal. The most effective objections tend to fall into the following categories:

1. The Land Is Not Required

If your land is not strictly necessary for the scheme perhaps it is included for convenience, safeguarding or flexibility this can be a strong ground of objection.

Authorities must justify why each parcel of land is needed, not simply why the scheme as a whole is desirable.

 

2. The Scheme Is Not Deliverable

A CPO should not be confirmed unless there is a reasonable prospect of implementation. Objections often succeed where:

  • Funding is uncertain or conditional

  • Key consents have not been secured

  • The scheme timetable is unrealistic

Evidence showing delivery risk can undermine the “compelling case” required for confirmation.

 

3. The Impact Is Disproportionate

Even where a scheme has merit, the extent of land-take or interference with rights must be proportionate.

Examples include:

  • Excessive permanent acquisition where temporary rights would suffice

  • Failure to mitigate impacts on access, servicing, or business operations

  • Inclusion of land that could be avoided by reasonable design changes

 

4. Inadequate Consideration of Alternatives

Promoters must demonstrate that reasonable alternatives have been properly considered.

This may include:

  • Alternative alignments or layouts

  • Partial acquisition rather than full take

  • Retention of access or operational land

A well-reasoned objection can expose weaknesses in the promoter’s site selection or option testing.

 

The Objection Process Explained

The process typically follows these stages:

  1. CPO is made and published

  2. Statutory objection period opens (often 21–42 days)

  3. Objections are submitted in writing

  4. If objections remain outstanding, a public inquiry or hearing may be held

  5. The Inspector reports to the confirming authority

  6. The CPO is confirmed, modified, or rejected

Once confirmed, options narrow significantly. Early, properly framed objections are critical.

 

Why Evidence Matters More Than Emotion

Decision-makers place limited weight on personal hardship alone. What matters is evidence:

  • Valuation evidence showing excessive land-take

  • Planning evidence questioning deliverability

  • Operational evidence showing business disruption

  • Technical evidence on access, servicing, or design

This is where specialist professional input can materially shift the balance.

How Olden Property Can Help

At Olden Property, we regularly advise owners and occupiers affected by CPOs across infrastructure, regeneration and transport schemes.

Our role includes:

  • Reviewing CPO plans and land schedules

  • Advising on whether there are defensible grounds of objection

  • Preparing valuation and land-use evidence to support objections

  • Working alongside solicitors and planning advisers during inquiries

  • Positioning cases strategically for negotiation, even where schemes proceed

In many cases, the objective is not simply to stop a scheme, but to protect value, reduce impact, and strengthen compensation outcomes.

Objecting to a Compulsory Purchase Order is not about resisting change for its own sake. It is about ensuring that compulsory powers are exercised lawfully, proportionately, and only where truly justified.

If your land or business is affected, taking early professional advice can be the difference between reacting to a confirmed order and actively shaping the outcome.

 

 

GET IN TOUCH
Previous
Previous

Ground Rent Reform and Lease Extensions: What Applies Now (and What Doesn’t)

Next
Next

Heathrow Third Runway: January 2026 Update – What It Means for Property Owners