Wellington v. Secretary of State for Transport [electronic resource]
Wellington v. Secretary of State for Transport [electronic resource]
- 2005
[2005] EWLands ACQ/42/2004, 28 September 2005. The claimant in this case was the owner of a plot of woodland, part of which was compulsorily purchased by the Secretary of State for Transport in order to widen the A229 near Chatham in Kent. The claimant argued that he was entitled to at least £10 000, claiming that this figure reflected the loss of hope value of the land and injurious affection of the retained land due to such issues as noise and smell. "Held": it was decided that the land, being within an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty of Special Landscape, and being woodland, really had no development value as such. The issues of injurious affection were also considered irrelevant to a piece of land with the sole purpose of being woodland. The judge considered compensation values based on the amounts given for two other settlements and decided on a figure of £5000 plus £1000 for the claimant's time plus reasonable surveyors fees.
WELLINGTON V SOS TRANSPORT
England--886-
[2005] EWLands ACQ/42/2004, 28 September 2005. The claimant in this case was the owner of a plot of woodland, part of which was compulsorily purchased by the Secretary of State for Transport in order to widen the A229 near Chatham in Kent. The claimant argued that he was entitled to at least £10 000, claiming that this figure reflected the loss of hope value of the land and injurious affection of the retained land due to such issues as noise and smell. "Held": it was decided that the land, being within an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty of Special Landscape, and being woodland, really had no development value as such. The issues of injurious affection were also considered irrelevant to a piece of land with the sole purpose of being woodland. The judge considered compensation values based on the amounts given for two other settlements and decided on a figure of £5000 plus £1000 for the claimant's time plus reasonable surveyors fees.
WELLINGTON V SOS TRANSPORT
England--886-