L & B Holdings Limited (1) L & B Haulage & Civil Engineering Contractors Limited (2) v London Borough of Brent
Decision date: 3 February 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKUT 24 (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 appeal concerned when claimants were entitled to recover costs after the acquiring authority made a sealed offer in a compulsory purchase reference for land at Hannah Close. The claimants accepted the £450,000 sealed offer on 18 January 2010 only after receiving a draft undertaking; the Tribunal held it was reasonable to wait and ordered the authority to pay costs on the standard basis up to 18 January 2010 (plus the costs of the costs hearing). Compensation was agreed by consent at £450,000 plus statutory interest.
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
Where a sealed offer is accompanied by or depends on a consequential undertaking that is material to acceptance, a claimant may reasonably delay acceptance until that undertaking is provided; in such circumstances the Tribunal may award costs up to the actual date of acceptance. The Tribunal will be guided by Part 36 principles (including the 21-day period) but retains a discretion to fix the appropriate period for costs entitlement by reference to reasonableness and the parties’ conduct.
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 indicated it would be inappropriate to resolve substantive issues such as whether the claim was exaggerated without hearing full evidence. It also noted that imminent hearings and necessary trial preparation can justify interim costs incurred after an offer is made.
Warning
This chunk contains repeated passages and formatting artefacts; some text is duplicated. Notes include duplicated passages and formatting artefacts; some parts of the judgment text may be incomplete.