000			01580cab a2200217 4500
001			ABS44237
008			090401t1991 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u46030
041			_aeng
245			_aHertfordshire CC v Ozanne and others
260			_c1991
350			_a0
490			_aWeekly Law Reports _v1991 WLR 105-119(10)
520			_aHL 14 February 1991. Appeal by Hertfordshire CC (H) against a CA decision (Abstract 41679) covering the assessment of value of land acquired by a compulsory purchase order for highway improvements . The claimants Ozanne and others (O) referred their claim for compensation to LT, claiming that as the land had been acquired for residential development thus enhancing its value . LT determined compensation of £1,240,000 as against the agreed agricultural value of the land at £5,500 on the grounds that it was a ransom strip . H appealed to CA claiming that the LT had not observed the Pointe Gourde principle or properly applied Land Compensation Act s5 Rule 3 . CA referred the case back to the LT but agreed that Rule 3 did not apply. H applied for leave to appeal to the HL. HL held that under the Land Compensation Act 1961 s5(3), the special suitability of land for a purpose was only to be disregarded in assessing compensation for compulsory purchase if the statutory powers in pursuance of
650			_aACCESS
650			_aFARMLAND
650			_aLAND VALUES
690			_aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT-COMPULSORY PURCHASE AND COMPENSATION
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c29121 _d29121