(1) Graham Michael Scott (2) Abigail Ahern and Others v The Secretary of State for Transport

Decision date: 30 March 2010

Neutral citation: [2010] UKUT 93 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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 seven references arising from compulsory acquisition of six subsoil interests (and one surface plot) for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Section 2). The Tribunal held that for five determined references the open market value of each deep subsoil interest was nominally £50, with no compensation for injurious affection, severance or disturbance, but awarded £500 legal/survey fees per claim and statutory interest from 1 September 2002; two remaining references were stayed until 21 April 2010. No order as to costs was made.

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

Where there is no open market for deep subsoil interests and no evidence of damage or market demand beyond compulsory acquisition, nominal market value may be appropriate for compensation; compensation under the relevant compulsory acquisition statutes is confined to recognised heads (market value and statutory items) and absent evidence of injury severance or disturbance such heads need not be awarded.

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 judgment records expert evidence that surveys showed no tunnelling-attributable damage, supporting the refusal to award disturbance or injurious affection; and notes that parties may seek precautionary Tribunal determinations where conveyance completion is uncertain even after agreement on compensation.