Deryn O'Rourke v Keuper Gas Storage Limited
Decision date: 15 May 2018
Neutral citation: [2018] UKUT 160 (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 concerns a blight notice served by Deryn O'Rourke in respect of Brownhayes Farm after Keuper Gas Storage sought Class E rights over about 270m of the farm's private driveway to facilitate a large underground gas storage Project. The Tribunal held that for the statutory test the driveway should be treated as part of the house/hereditament and that, judged as at the date of the counter-notice and on a realistic assessment of the Project as a whole, taking the Rights would not cause material detriment (ground (c)), so the respondent succeeded on that ground. The Tribunal left open the separate question of whether the Project prevented sale except at a substantially lower price (ground (g)), which the claimant still needed to prove.
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 binding ratio that can be safely extracted is that, for the purposes of assessing material detriment under ground (c), the correct question is whether the rights sought can be taken as part of the Project as a whole without causing material detriment to the remainder of the house/hereditament; material detriment is assessed by reference to the effect of the Project as a whole on the usefulness or value of the property, judged realistically as at the date of the counter-notice. Also, where a driveway is the sole access on the same title, it may properly be treated as part of the house for the compulsory-acquisition statutory test.
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 (obiter) that improvements such as resurfacing may be a benefit rather than a detriment to purchasers, that security features and temporary construction structures—though detracting from rural character—need not necessarily cause material detriment, and that some proposed works may fall within pre-existing rights, reducing the marginal impact of newly conferred rights.