Ryde International plc v London Regional Transport
Ryde International plc v London Regional Transport
- 2004
- Rating and Valuation Reporter [2004] RVR 60-65(7) .
[2004] EWCA Civ 232, 5 March 2004. Appeal by claimant R against LT decision (ACQ/147/2000, Abs67059) with regards to compensation payable to R for freehold interest in block of flats compulsorily acquired by L in connection with the Croydon Tramlink Scheme. Appeal was concerned with the assessment of compensation payable at valuation date. LT had assessed the compensation due to R under Land Compensation Act 1961 s5-rule-2 for the value of the land in the open market at the valuation date and concluded that R was not entitled to be separately compensated for loss of profit under the 1961 Act s5-rule-6. R argued that if the land had not been acquired by T it would have marketed and sold the flats to individual purchasers at a profit and that assessing the value on the basis of a single sale was tantamount to paying less for the land than it was really worth. "Held": LT decision upheld on the grounds that R was not entitled to separate compensation under s5-rule-6 as compensation for the value of the land on the valuation date had reflected its potentiality for profit making. (See also Abs63843). View judgment at www.bailii.org.
RYDE INTERNATIONAL PLC V LONDON REGIONAL TRANSPORT
COMPENSATION
LAND COMPENSATION ACT 1961 S5-RULE-5
LAND COMPENSATION ACT 1961 S5-RULE-5
DIRECTOR OF BUILDINGS AND LANDS V SHUN FUNG IRONWORKS LTD
SHELTERED HOUSING
REPAIR COSTS
MANAGEMENT COSTS
OPEN MARKET VALUE
BLIGHT
LOSS OF PROFITS
COSTS
FREEHOLD INTEREST
[2004] EWCA Civ 232, 5 March 2004. Appeal by claimant R against LT decision (ACQ/147/2000, Abs67059) with regards to compensation payable to R for freehold interest in block of flats compulsorily acquired by L in connection with the Croydon Tramlink Scheme. Appeal was concerned with the assessment of compensation payable at valuation date. LT had assessed the compensation due to R under Land Compensation Act 1961 s5-rule-2 for the value of the land in the open market at the valuation date and concluded that R was not entitled to be separately compensated for loss of profit under the 1961 Act s5-rule-6. R argued that if the land had not been acquired by T it would have marketed and sold the flats to individual purchasers at a profit and that assessing the value on the basis of a single sale was tantamount to paying less for the land than it was really worth. "Held": LT decision upheld on the grounds that R was not entitled to separate compensation under s5-rule-6 as compensation for the value of the land on the valuation date had reflected its potentiality for profit making. (See also Abs63843). View judgment at www.bailii.org.
RYDE INTERNATIONAL PLC V LONDON REGIONAL TRANSPORT
COMPENSATION
LAND COMPENSATION ACT 1961 S5-RULE-5
LAND COMPENSATION ACT 1961 S5-RULE-5
DIRECTOR OF BUILDINGS AND LANDS V SHUN FUNG IRONWORKS LTD
SHELTERED HOUSING
REPAIR COSTS
MANAGEMENT COSTS
OPEN MARKET VALUE
BLIGHT
LOSS OF PROFITS
COSTS
FREEHOLD INTEREST