Challenge to the sums awarded on compulsory acquisition of grazing land, but which land had a substantial hope value for residential development.
Held: The tribunal’s application of these difficult provisions to the complex facts of this case was exemplary. The appeal was allowed and the Court set aside the order of the Court of Appeal.
‘the tribunal were clearly entitled to regard the underlying policies, including the allocation in the development plan, as potentially relevant also to the prospect of development apart from the KBP scheme. The assessment of their significance in the no KBP universe was pre-eminently a matter for them. Mr Humphries does not argue otherwise. As the very experienced members of a specialist tribunal, who had also visited the area, they were well equipped for that task. Their approach appears most clearly in their concluding passage at para 96 (see above). There they properly took account of the pattern of development as seen by them on the ground, and the long history of identification of this land for substantial development. They did not ignore potential policy objections, such as under PPG3 or policy EC/6, but took the view that they would not have sufficient weight to rule out the possibility of development in the absence of the KBP scheme. That reasoning discloses no error of law.’
Judges:
Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes
Citations:
[2017] UKSC 12, UKSC 2015/0153
Links:
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Video summary, SC Vid 12/01/17 am, SC Vid 12/01/17 pm
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Pointe Gourde Quarrying and Transport Co Ltd v Sub-Intendant of Crown Lands PC 29-Jul-1947
Under a wartime agreement in 1941 the UK government agreed to lease to the US Government land in Trinidad on which the US could establish a naval base. To do this the Crown acquired the Pointe Gourde land for its limestone quarry which would be used . .
Cited – Waters and others v Welsh Development Agency HL 29-Apr-2004
Land was to be compulsorily purchased. A large development required the land to be used to create a nature reserve. The question was how and if at all the value of the overall scheme should be considered when assessing the compensation for this . .
Appeal from – J S Bloor (Wilmslow) Ltd v Homes and Communities Agency CA 22-May-2015
The land owner challenged the amount awarded on the compulsory purchase of land. Although agricultural, it had substantial hope value with possible residential development.
Held: The assessment of compensation should be remitted to the Upper . .
Cited – Transport for London (London Underground Ltd) v Spirerose Ltd HL 30-Jul-2009
Compulsory Purchase Compensation – Land As it Is
The House considered the basis of calculation of compensation on the compulsory purchase of land without planning permission, but where permission would probably be granted. The appellant challenged the decision which had treated the probability as . .
Cited – Camrose v Basingstoke Corporation CA 1966
Basingstoke was to be expanded to receive overspill population from London and the corporation contracted to purchase about 550 acres from a landowner on terms that the price would be assessed as though the land had been compulsorily acquired under . .
Cited – Newell and others v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another; Fletcher Estates (Harlescott) Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Another HL 17-Feb-2000
Where a certificate of appropriate development was issued for land to be acquired compulsorily, the land was to be valued at the date of the proposal to acquire it compulsorily allowing a discount for any damage to the value incurred by the long . .
Cited – Thomas Newell Ltd v Lancaster City Council UTLC 8-Feb-2010
COMPENSATION – compulsory purchase – preliminary issues – planning permission – whether planning permission to be assumed on the basis that land allocated in development plan – whether any other expectation of planning permission as hope value – . .
Cited – Melwood Units Pty Limited v The Commissioner of Main Roads PC 23-May-1978
(Queensland) The Board considered the compensation payable on the compulsory purchase of land for the purpose of an expressway between Brisbane and Combabah. At the date of compulsory acquisition the project had reached the stage where it was . .
Cited – Minister of Transport v Pettitt CA 1967
. .
Cited – Jelson v Minister of Housing and Local Government CA 1969
A proposed ring road had been cancelled. The landowners applied for certificates of appropriate alternative development. The Minister confirmed the negative certificates which had been issued by the local planning authority. It was contended that . .
Cited – Rugby Joint Water Board v Shaw-Fox HL 1973
The water board obtained a compulsory purchase order to buy agricultural land adjoining a reservoir. The land was subject to protected tenancies under the 1948 Act.
Held: (Majority) Because the land subject to notices to treat was required for . .
Cited – Myers v Milton Keynes Development Corporation CA 1974
Land was to be acquired for the development of a new town. The court faced the issue, in the context of a valuation for compulsory purchase, of whether the required disregard of any increase in value attributable to the ‘scheme’ meant that the . .
Cited – Jelson Ltd v Blaby District Council CA 1977
A strip of land had been originally reserved for a road, and was subsequently sold to the council under a purchase notice. A claim for compensation was made. On appeal the Minister issued a nil certificate on the basis that the correct time at which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.575311
