SOPHIA MARIA VOYAZIDES v (1)CHARLES GEORGE SAMUEL EYRE (2)JAMES HENRY ROBERT EYRE (3)PETER LOMAS (4)HUGH JOHN LOMAS (in their capacity as Trustees of the Eyre Estate)
Decision date: 22 January 2013
Neutral citation: [2013] UKUT 13 (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 was a Tribunal rehearing of an appeal under s.9(1C) Leasehold Reform Act 1967 about the unimproved vacant possession values of freehold and leasehold interests in 60 Avenue Road, and the relativity for a 19.16-year unexpired term. The Tribunal preferred direct freehold comparables (notably No.64) and graph-based relativity evidence (mean ~42%) over a single combined lease-sale-plus-enfranchisement transaction, found unimproved freehold value £15,000,000 and unimproved leasehold value £6,300,000, refused allowances for proposed school blight or proximity to the Israeli ambassador, and dismissed the appeal, fixing the enfranchisement price at £7,430,000.
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 market transactional evidence is sparse or disputed, geographically and property-type specific graphs of relativity may legitimately be preferred to a single contested combined transaction when determining relativity; a combined lease sale plus enfranchisement price may only indicate a minimum unencumbered freehold value and is secondary to clear direct freehold comparables because it risks circularity and uncertainty.
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 marketing particulars stressing redevelopment potential do not automatically convert a sale into a development-site comparable if purchaser conduct and other evidence show the property was valued as an existing house with potential; likewise, security presence from a prominent neighbour can be neutral or mixed in its effect and does not automatically justify a discount without evidence of adverse market perception.