JOHN RICHARD WESTMACOTT ALEXANDER CRAIG-MOONEY JAMES EDWARD CHICHESTER (IN THE CAPACITY AS TRUSTEES OF THE MEYRICK 1970 SETTLEMENT) v JOSEPH ACKERMAN NAOMI ACKERMAN
Decision date: 20 November 2012
Neutral citation: [2012] UKUT 415 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This case concerned the open market valuation of the freehold reversions of 59 and 61 Grove Road, Bournemouth (valuation date 12 March 2008) with about 21 years unexpired on the leases. The tribunal rejected the appellants' method of aggregating assumed long-lease sale prices less repair costs and preferred an investment-based/residual approach using appropriate yields and deferment to reflect market risk; the appeals were dismissed and the confirmed prices payable were £466,300 (No.59) and £231,400 (No.61).
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
The tribunal treated the open market value of a freehold reversion as to be assessed by reference to market values at the valuation date (assumed sale with vacant possession) and, where appropriate, by deferring those values for the remaining term; valuers should use a realistic residual/investment methodology that includes selling, repair and developer costs and a profit allowance rather than simply aggregating improved long-lease sale prices less repair costs.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The tribunal noted that RICS relativity graphs can serve as a useful check but may be of limited assistance where repair obligations differ significantly; it also observed that bulk-sale discounts and depressed market conditions can justify lower prices and that deferment rates reflect the risk of future market volatility rather than replacing valuation-date market evidence.