Updated MCHLG compulsory purchase guidance – Conditional CPOs

Executive summary

On 17 June 2026, the Government published updated technical guidance on the compulsory purchase process. The amended guidance is primarily aimed towards supporting local authorities, developers and landowners to understand and implement recent changes affecting the compulsory purchase process and associated compensation regime introduced through both the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (“LURA”), and the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 (“PIA”).

The overarching objective of the Government is to address stalled development or underutilised land, and one way the amended guidance seeks to achieve this is through the introduction of Conditional Compulsory Purchase Orders (“CPOs”). This mechanism will enable confirming authorities to provisionally approve CPOs subject to resolving specific impediments, thereby enabling a more flexible and delivery-focused approach without compromising the requirement for a compelling public interest case.

This article will assess the information outlined within the updated guidance, and provide insight into the key details, practical implications, and potential risk implications that may arise from the changes.

New guidance

The principal takeaway arising from the updated guidance relates to the mechanism available for confirming authorities to conditionally confirm CPOs. The concept of “conditional CPOs” was initially introduced through LURA with the relevant provisions in section 183 officially enacted from February 2026. The statutory framework was subsequently implemented through the Compulsory Purchase of Land (Conditional Confirmation) Regulations 2026 and applies subject to satisfying Part 2 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (section 13BA).

The conditional CPO mechanism follows the Government’s planning reform working paper “Speeding Up Build Out” published May 2025, which identified procedural inefficiencies within the compulsory purchase process and compensation regime, which are said to have resulted in a significant amount of suitable land being underutilised or remaining vacant. The updated 2026 guidance, and “faster, more permissive planning system”, referred to in the Working Paper, seeks to provide greater flexibility for ‘stalled’ projects obtaining confirmed CPO’s, aimed primarily towards achieving ambitious Government housing targets, as well as improving land assembly, speeding-up site delivery, and supporting the delivery of infrastructure, amenity and transport benefits. 

The changes around compensation also support targets to improve compulsory purchase efficiency, notably through removing ‘hope value” for public interest schemes. The Government’s ambition is to enable quicker, fairer decisions when deciding quantum for landowners, rather than assessing baseline and predicted values.

Practical impact

Historically, decisions surrounding CPOs always operated as binary determinations; CPOs were either confirmed, or refused. Conditional CPOs will instead enable confirming authorities to provisionally confirm CPOs subject to satisfying specific, related conditions. This would apply to schemes where more granular project background details are incomplete or where certain issues (“impediments”) are unresolved entering the confirmation decision stage.

Consistent with the previous iteration of the guidance, confirming authorities continue to require that proposed CPOs are supported by evidence that satisfies compliance with existing statutory obligations (outlined in sections 49.2 and 49.3). In particular, these require acquiring authorities to demonstrate that there is a “compelling case in the public interest” which justifies compulsory acquisition, and that any associated interference with private property rights is entirely proportionate.

The slight deviation between conventional and conditional CPO’s on the “compelling case” test centres around the timeline, whereby confirming authorities under in a conditional CPO scenario may now provisionally accept the case for “public interest”, provided any identified impediments impacting delivery are overcome through satisfying related conditions. Once successfully resolved, the CPO then becomes enforceable.

The guidance provides general examples when confirming authorities could impose conditions, including circumstances where:

• a landowner has promoted an alternative scheme but refused to give a binding undertaking to deliver it. A condition could require the landowner to take specified steps within a fixed period, failing which the acquiring authority may apply for discharge of the pre-exercise condition.
• the scheme funding depends on the acquiring authority demonstrating control or ownership of the land. A condition could require the authority to provide funder confirmation, within a specified period, that funding will be released once the CPO is capable of being exercised.  
• a decision depends on an outstanding planning permission, consent or licence. A condition could require the acquiring authority to confirm, within a specified period, that the necessary approval has been granted
• The guidance provides examples of what conditions may look like in practice:
• “The condition is that the development comprised in planning permission reference [insert reference number] has not been completed in accordance with that permission within 12 months of the date of this letter/report”
• “The condition is that a development delivery agreement has been entered into by the interest holder of the land identified in column W, row X, Table Y in Schedule Z to the compulsory purchase order and the milestones set out in that agreement have not been met within 12 months of the date of this letter/report”
• “The condition is the funding indicated by the acquiring authority, which is the subject of an outstanding application at the time of this decision, is in place (whether or not due to the success of the application) within 3 months of the date of this letter/report”

In addition, the guidance requires that a confirming authority, upon issuing a conditional CPO, includes within the associated confirmation notice the pre-exercise condition(s) imposed by the confirming authority, and the deadline specified by the confirming authority for when an application is to be made by the acquiring authority that the pre-exercise condition(s) has been met.

Potential risks

Whilst the changes largely provide increased options, and flexibility, for both developers and local authorities navigating the compulsory purchase order process, there are potential risks associated, particularly in the short-term transitional stage:

• Conditional CPOs aren’t substitutes for under-prepared schemes. Confirming authorities will not confirm  ‘half-baked’ arguments seeking conditions to promote insufficiently justified schemes, without an underlying strong case. Difficulties may also arise where multiple interrelated conditions are required.
• Conditional CPOs still require adequate clarity. There should be evidence that the relevant impediments identified are capable of being resolved. For example, if a CPO scheme provides no indication of whether or how funding is capable of being secured that would not constitute a valid condition.
• Not all impediments can be resolved through condition. Where the impediment is not a binary issue (e.g. the grant or refusal of funding) a conditional CPO may not be appropriate.
• The time to discharge conditions post-confirmation is at the discretion of the confirming authority. Applicants may have limited powers available to contest, or extend, the time period in which conditions must be fulfilled in order to exercise the CPO.

How can we help?

Our planning & compulsory purchase team has extensive experience of advising developers and local authorities throughout the compulsory purchase order process, including both promotion and compensation.  If you would like to discuss how the introduction of conditional CPOs may affect a current or proposed project, please contact Gary Soloman, Jen Ashwell or Connor Maunder.