HONG XUE v HONG XUE v (1) MR FRANCIS W R CHERRY (2) MRS JANET R CHERRY
Decision date: 30 November 2015
Neutral citation: [2015] UKUT 651 (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 the premium for a lease extension of the top flat at 17 Ormiston Road, with disputed deferment rate and relativity for a lease with 72.167 years unexpired. The Upper Tribunal reheard the case, rejected the appellant valuer's theoretical model and bespoke local relativity graphs as unreliable, accepted a 5% deferment rate and a 91.4% relativity (from weighted published graphs including Cluttons) and dismissed the appeal, fixing the premium at £37,545. No allowance was made for any benefit under the 1993 Act for this lease term.
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
A valuer's untested theoretical model or bespoke indices must be supported by empirical market evidence before they can be given weight; where published relativity/settlement graphs exist, it is permissible to use and weight those graphs (including Cluttons PCL) if local transactional evidence is insufficient.
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 indexing historic property prices over long, volatile periods can produce materially different and unreliable results, and that First-tier Tribunal leasehold valuation decisions or settlements have limited evidential value unless their underlying evidence is analysed.