Ryde International Plc v London Regional Transport
Decision date: 12 February 2000
Neutral citation: Neutral citation not available
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
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: medium
This case concerned the compulsory acquisition valuation of a block of sheltered housing (37 flats and 5 bungalows) with possession taken 8 August 1997. The Tribunal fixed the interim open market value under rule 2 at £2,060,000 (with statutory interest) and, applying a diminishing-balance interest method and agreed management/repair deductions, found no compensatable holding costs under rule 6 for the period from 25 March 1993 to 8 August 1997. The Tribunal preferred the acquiring authority’s conventional residual valuation method for rule 2 but left open the claimant’s contention that loss of development profit might be recoverable as disturbance under rule 6 and invited further submissions on that point.
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
The clear ratio is that prospective developer profits are reflected in the rule 2 open market valuation only insofar as they affect market value; where such profits are not reflected in that valuation they may nonetheless be claimed as disturbance under rule 6. Agreed procedural valuation formulas should be interpreted in line with normal accounting convention (here, net rental income reduces borrowing/interest).
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 observed that the claimant’s business character (a mobile property developer) may influence whether loss is treated within the land value or as disturbance, and that a purchaser’s required profit margin and realistic refurbishment costs are proper elements of a conventional residual valuation; expert “ball‑park” estimates may be adjusted by the Tribunal.