Bolton MBC v Tudor Properties Limited and Others
Series: Rating and Valuation Reporter ; 40 (9) [2000] RVR 292-296(5)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: CA 19 April 2000. T's claim for compensation for the compulsory purchase of their freehold interest in 11.186ha land was determined by the LT. In making its valuation the LT held that the scheme which must be disregarded was the leisure development of the land by developers THI. The LT rejected an argument that the scheme which must be ignored was a wider scheme, and gave three reasons why the narrower scheme must be disregarded. The Council appealed. Appeal dismissed because there was no error of law in the LT's reasons for its conclusion on the scope of the scheme underlying the acquisition. Duplicated at [2000] RVR 348-351(4)| Item type | Current library | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | 1 | Available | 108946-1001 |
CA 19 April 2000. T's claim for compensation for the compulsory purchase of their freehold interest in 11.186ha land was determined by the LT. In making its valuation the LT held that the scheme which must be disregarded was the leisure development of the land by developers THI. The LT rejected an argument that the scheme which must be ignored was a wider scheme, and gave three reasons why the narrower scheme must be disregarded. The Council appealed. Appeal dismissed because there was no error of law in the LT's reasons for its conclusion on the scope of the scheme underlying the acquisition. Duplicated at [2000] RVR 348-351(4)