Sheila Grace Hall v London Borough of Hillingdon

Sheila Grace Hall v London Borough of Hillingdon

The Tribunal rejected the ransom and hope value claims, finding that at the valuation date BA was not a special purchaser and that planning prospects for alternative use were too remote due to Green Belt status. The land's value was determined by its existing use as a scrap yard, set at £700,000 per acre (£532,000 for 0.76 acres), with an additional £20,000 for disturbance. The claimant's failure to mitigate and lack of evidence for greater disturbance losses limited recovery. No order as to costs was made due to procedural failings by the claimant but also shortcomings in the authority's expert evidence.

Parties
Claimant: Sheila Grace Hall; Acquiring Authority: London Borough of Hillingdon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Reference / Final Judgment With Costs Addendum
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; compensation awarded for land at existing use value plus limited disturbance; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Compulsory Purchase, Land Compensation, Ransom Value, Hope Value, Disturbance Compensation, Planning Status, Green Belt, Valuation, Land Compensation Act 1961
Land Law Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Law Compulsory Purchase Land Compensation Ransom Value Hope Value Disturbance Compensation +4 more

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheila Grace Hall

Claimant

London Borough of Hillingdon

Acquiring Authority

Procedural Posture

Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Reference / Final Judgment With Costs Addendum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation based on ransom value, hope value, or existing use value for compulsory acquisition of land
  2. 2 Whether the acquiring authority or BA was a special purchaser
  3. 3 Whether disturbance compensation is payable and to what extent

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal rejected the ransom and hope value claims, finding that at the valuation date BA was not a special purchaser and that planning prospects for alternative use were too remote due to Green Belt status. The land's value was determined by its existing use as a scrap yard, set at £700,000 per acre (£532,000 for 0.76 acres), with an additional £20,000 for disturbance. The claimant's failure to mitigate and lack of evidence for greater disturbance losses limited recovery. No order as to costs was made due to procedural failings by the claimant but also shortcomings in the authority's expert evidence.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; compensation awarded for land at existing use value plus limited disturbance; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Total compensation of £552,000 awarded to claimant (£532,000 for land, £20,000 for disturbance)
  • No order as to costs; each party to bear own costs