Ryde International Plc v London Regional Transport [2003] EWLands ACQ_147_2000 (28 March 2003)

Ryde International Plc v London Regional Transport [2003] EWLands ACQ_147_2000 (28 March 2003)

The open market value of the land is what it would fetch if sold as a whole to a developer at the valuation date, not the aggregate of individual unit sales over time. The claimant is not entitled to include development profit in the land value but may claim for loss of profits as disturbance under rule 6. Holding costs are compensatable only if the calculation produces a positive figure after offsetting rents and management costs against interest on the delayed sale value.

Citation
[2003] EWLands ACQ_147_2000
Parties
Claimant: Ryde International Plc; Acquiring Authority: London Regional Transport
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Compensation Claim for Compulsory Acquisition / Final Decision on Compensation, Interim as to Disturbance Claim
Outcome
Interim decision: Compensation for land value awarded at £2,060,000; no additional disturbance claim for loss of future profits under rule 6 at this stage; parties invited to make submissions on disturbance claim.
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition of Land, Valuation of Land, Compensation for Disturbance, Holding Costs, Loss of Profits
Compulsory Purchase Land Compensation Compulsory Acquisition of Land Valuation of Land Compensation for Disturbance Holding Costs Loss of Profits

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryde International Plc

Claimant

London Regional Transport

Acquiring Authority

Procedural Posture

Compensation Claim for Compulsory Acquisition / Final Decision on Compensation, Interim as to Disturbance Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How should the open market value of the compulsorily acquired property be assessed?
  2. 2 Are holding costs compensatable and if so, how should they be calculated?
  3. 3 Is the claimant entitled to compensation for loss of future profits under rule 6?

Ratio Decidendi

The open market value of the land is what it would fetch if sold as a whole to a developer at the valuation date, not the aggregate of individual unit sales over time. The claimant is not entitled to include development profit in the land value but may claim for loss of profits as disturbance under rule 6. Holding costs are compensatable only if the calculation produces a positive figure after offsetting rents and management costs against interest on the delayed sale value.

Court Disposition

Interim decision: Compensation for land value awarded at £2,060,000; no additional disturbance claim for loss of future profits under rule 6 at this stage; parties invited to make submissions on disturbance claim.

Orders

  • Compensation for land value set at £2,060,000 plus statutory interest from valuation date.
  • No holding costs awarded as calculation did not produce a positive figure.