STEPHEN DOWNSWORTH TAMMY DOWNSWORTH v Manchester City Council
Decision date: 21 March 2013
Neutral citation: [2013] UKUT 142 (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 concerns a dispute over the reasonableness and recoverability of a surveyor's fees claimed by the Downsworths for compulsory purchase compensation for 64 Stopford Street. The Tribunal held the claimant's contracted rate (£175/hr) and the hours claimed were excessive and disproportionate for a typical residential claim, accepted the council's comparative evidence, and awarded £3,840 plus VAT and disbursements of £207.50 while dismissing the interest claim and disallowing preparation and generic-fee discussion costs.
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
Fees payable to a surveyor in a compulsory purchase reference must be proportionate to the size and complexity of the claim and commensurate with the time, effort and expertise actually required; comparative evidence of fees and hours paid in similar local cases is relevant and may justify reduction where a claimant’s claimed rate or time is out of line.
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 record the view that a compensating authority may properly challenge an advisor's agreed contractual rate where it is excessive for public expenditure purposes, and that Part 1 of the Arbitration Act 1996 does not apply to Lands Chamber references except by consent under the Tribunal rules. These appear as commentary rather than binding ratio.