Image from Google Jackets

Hartnell and another v Chelmsford D C

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; 284(6354) 3 October 1987, 71-78(3)Publication details: 1987Subject(s): Summary: LT 8 July 1987 (Ref/8/1986). Reference for determination of amount of compensation to which the claimants (H) are entitled, for the compulsory acquisition of their property by the defendant acquiring authority (C). The property, a freehold , three-storey end-of-terrace building, consisted of a Chinese take-away restaurant on the ground floor and two flats occupied by the restaurant tenant (H) and his family on the first and second floors. H held the premises under a FRI lease granted in March 1982 for 15 years at the rents: £5,000pa for the first five years and £6,500 for the second five years. The lease contained a rent review clause in respect of the rent payable during the last five years. An advertisement hoarding , attached to one of the flank walls, was let at £650pa. H claimed compensation of £98,670 against C`s contention of £50,030 at the valuation date in June 1985. H`s valuer assumed a reserved rent of £5,500 for the second five years; C`s valuer assumed a rent of £5,650.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS38270 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 9679-1001

LT 8 July 1987 (Ref/8/1986). Reference for determination of amount of compensation to which the claimants (H) are entitled, for the compulsory acquisition of their property by the defendant acquiring authority (C). The property, a freehold , three-storey end-of-terrace building, consisted of a Chinese take-away restaurant on the ground floor and two flats occupied by the restaurant tenant (H) and his family on the first and second floors. H held the premises under a FRI lease granted in March 1982 for 15 years at the rents: £5,000pa for the first five years and £6,500 for the second five years. The lease contained a rent review clause in respect of the rent payable during the last five years. An advertisement hoarding , attached to one of the flank walls, was let at £650pa. H claimed compensation of £98,670 against C`s contention of £50,030 at the valuation date in June 1985. H`s valuer assumed a reserved rent of £5,500 for the second five years; C`s valuer assumed a rent of £5,650.