Meghnagi v Hackney LBC [electronic resource]
Meghnagi v Hackney LBC [electronic resource]
- 2008
[2008] EWCA Civ 919, 20 December 2007. The freehold interest in a house in hackney was valued at £147 500 as at November 2000, when the house became vested in the local authority after a compulsory purchase. Claimant (M) asked the tribunal to determine the compensation payable to him after the respondent local authority (H) used compulsory purchase to acquire his house. M had left the property in 1993, although his wife and children remained in it until 1997. The property was then left derelict. H decided to sell the property at auction and then withdrew it, instead asking for informal tenders. M argued that the property was worth £320 000, H £120 000. Held: appeal dismissed. Figure was assessed at £147 500 - reached by taking the highest figure offered to H for the property (£135 000) and adding legal and valuation costs in addition to a 15% increase as the high bidder had overestimated the remedial works required to return the property to a habitable condition. This figure was £163 500, and was subsequently adjusted downwards to reflect the difference between Land Registry indexes between the valuation date of November 2007 and the offer date of July 2001.
MEGHNAGI V HACKNEY LBC
United Kingdom--
[2008] EWCA Civ 919, 20 December 2007. The freehold interest in a house in hackney was valued at £147 500 as at November 2000, when the house became vested in the local authority after a compulsory purchase. Claimant (M) asked the tribunal to determine the compensation payable to him after the respondent local authority (H) used compulsory purchase to acquire his house. M had left the property in 1993, although his wife and children remained in it until 1997. The property was then left derelict. H decided to sell the property at auction and then withdrew it, instead asking for informal tenders. M argued that the property was worth £320 000, H £120 000. Held: appeal dismissed. Figure was assessed at £147 500 - reached by taking the highest figure offered to H for the property (£135 000) and adding legal and valuation costs in addition to a 15% increase as the high bidder had overestimated the remedial works required to return the property to a habitable condition. This figure was £163 500, and was subsequently adjusted downwards to reflect the difference between Land Registry indexes between the valuation date of November 2007 and the offer date of July 2001.
MEGHNAGI V HACKNEY LBC
United Kingdom--