SoS Transport v Christos and another
Series: Rating and Valuation Reporter ; [2003] RVR 307-312(5)(CS)Publication details: 2003Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2003] EWCA Civ 1073, 25 July 2003. Appeal and cross-appeal over LT ruling (ACQ/69/2001, LT123284) on the compensation of a property compulsorily purchased under the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Act 1996. In a letter headed subject to contract the acquiring authority offered to purchase the property for £500 000. Negotiations to purchase the property collapsed. C vacated the property which later developed water damage. In May 2001, C applied to the LT to determine the amount of compensation payable for the acquisition of their property. 17 May 1999 was agreed as valuation date. LT maintained that there was no binding agreement between the parties for a payment of £500 000 but used this figure as a basis for valuation and then deducted £15 000 in respect of a defect in C's title to part of its land. A's argument that deduction should be made for water damage was rejected. A appealed and C cross appealed against finding that no binding contract had been made. CA held that LT had firstly, correctly ruled that there was no binding contract between the parties and secondly that the LT was correct in valuing the property in its physical condition at the agreed date of valuation and that any deterioration in the state of the property after this date had no effect upon the compensation payable to C. Appeal allowed in part, cross-appeal dismissed. View judgment at www.bailii.org.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS66977 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 123283-1001 |
[2003] EWCA Civ 1073, 25 July 2003. Appeal and cross-appeal over LT ruling (ACQ/69/2001, LT123284) on the compensation of a property compulsorily purchased under the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Act 1996. In a letter headed subject to contract the acquiring authority offered to purchase the property for £500 000. Negotiations to purchase the property collapsed. C vacated the property which later developed water damage. In May 2001, C applied to the LT to determine the amount of compensation payable for the acquisition of their property. 17 May 1999 was agreed as valuation date. LT maintained that there was no binding agreement between the parties for a payment of £500 000 but used this figure as a basis for valuation and then deducted £15 000 in respect of a defect in C's title to part of its land. A's argument that deduction should be made for water damage was rejected. A appealed and C cross appealed against finding that no binding contract had been made. CA held that LT had firstly, correctly ruled that there was no binding contract between the parties and secondly that the LT was correct in valuing the property in its physical condition at the agreed date of valuation and that any deterioration in the state of the property after this date had no effect upon the compensation payable to C. Appeal allowed in part, cross-appeal dismissed. View judgment at www.bailii.org.