David Charles Newman v Cambridgeshire County Council

Decision date: 14 February 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKUT 56 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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 appeal concerned recovery of the claimant's surveyor's fees after compulsory acquisition of part of Mr Newman's garden under the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway Order. The Tribunal assessed competing schedules of time and rates and held that time-based fees at the hourly rates originally suggested (professional £120, travel £60) were reasonable and proportionate, excluding time spent on the Tribunal application. The Tribunal awarded £6,306 plus VAT in surveyor's fees and made no costs order for the written-representations reference.

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: medium

Where an acquiring authority initially makes an unrealistically low compensation offer requiring substantial work to obtain a proper settlement, the authority must pay reasonable surveyor's fees incurred in that process; in this case a time-based fee at hourly rates previously suggested (professional £120, travel £60) was held proportionate to the claim’s size and complexity and recoverable (with time on the Tribunal application excluded).

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 notes indicate it is suggested (but not framed as a binding holding) that claimants are entitled to reimbursement of reasonable surveyor's fees in addition to land compensation, and that authorities bear the reasonable cost of proper representation; also, without-prejudice settlement offers aimed at avoiding confrontation are not necessarily undermined by earlier conciliatory comments from authority representatives.