Archive for the 'valuation' Category

Transport for London (London Underground Ltd) v Spirerose Ltd (in administration) – WLR Daily

Transport for London (London Underground Ltd) v Spirerose Ltd (in administration) [2009] UKHL 44; [2009] WLR (D) 273

“Where permission for the redevelopment of the claimant’s land would on the balance of probability have been granted as at the valuation date, the Lands Tribunal had not been entitled to value the land on the basis that permission would actually have been granted rather than on the basis of ‘hope value’.”

WLR Daily, 31st July 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Earl Cadogan and Another v Sportelli and Another and Other Appeals – Times Law Reports

Earl Cadogan and Another v Sportelli and Another and Other Appeals

House of Lords

“Landlords and freeholders were generally not entitled to so-called ‘hope value’ as an element in the value of their interest in determining the price payable by the tenants for leasehold enfranchisement.”

The Times, 17th December 2008 

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Earl Cadogan and another v Sportelli and another – WLR Daily

Earl Cadogan and another v Sportelli and another [2008] UKHL 71; [2008] WLR (D) 378

“In determining the price payable by tenants for leasehold enfranchisement, landlords and freeholders generally were not entitled to ‘hope value’ as an element in the value of their interests.”

WLR Daily, 10th December 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Spirerose Ltd (In Administration) v Transport for London – WLR Daily

Spirerose Ltd (In Administration) v Transport for London [2008] EWCA Civ 1230; [2008] WLR (D) 358

“In concluding that a valuation of the claimant’s land on the basis that at the date of valuation there would have been a determined planning application granting permission , the Lands Tribunal had not erred. In the absence of an actual planning permission or a permission that was required to be assumed under the Land Compensation Act 1961, the tribunal was not limited to assessing the value by reference to the view that the market would have taken as to the prospects of achieving planning permission, the hope value.”

WLR Daily, 14th November 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Platform Funding Ltd v Bank of Scotland plc (formerly Halifax plc) – Times Law Reports

Platform Funding Ltd v Bank of Scotland plc (formerly Halifax plc)

Court of Appeal

“A mortgage lender who instructed a surveyor to value a property as security, was entitled to damages from the surveyor for the losses suffered after the borrower defaulted on the loan, and it was discovered that the wrong property had been valued in breach of an unqualified obligation to inspect the particular property.”

The Times, 6th October 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21days from the date of publication.

Platform Funding Ltd v Bank of Scotland plc (formerly Halifax plc) – WLR Daily

Platform Funding Ltd v Bank of Scotland plc (formerly Halifax plc) [2008] EWCA Civ 930; [2008] WLR (D) 283

“A surveyor, instructed by a mortgage lender to value the property offered by the borrower as security for a loan, who certified that the property had been inspected and a fair valuation given, was liable in damages to the mortgage lender for losses suffered as a result of having valued the wrong property in breach of an unqualified obligation to inspect the specified property.”

WLR Daily, 1st August 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Regina v Rose (Kevin) – Times Law Reports

Regina v Rose (Kevin)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

“When calculating the benefit to a thief or handler of his acquisition or possession of criminal property, the market value of it was the amount it would have cost him to obtain the property legitimately, or the economic value to the loser, rather than what the thief or handler could get for the property if he sold it.”

The Times, 6th March 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.


August 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Categories