Claristene Doreen Yarde v London Borough of Newham
Decision date: 29 March 2011
Neutral citation: [2011] UKUT 125 (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 compensation under a general vesting declaration for 24 Buckingham Road, with the valuation date held to be the vesting date, 15 January 2008. The tribunal accepted the acquiring authority's valuation approach: start with open‑market value in good order (about £300,000) then deduct contemporaneous refurbishment costs and a purchaser's reasonable profit, reaching £200,000 compensation plus statutory interest. The claimant's higher valuation and pre‑vesting repair estimates were rejected as insufficiently reliable, and the claimant was ordered to pay costs of £3,000.
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
Where land is taken under a general vesting declaration, valuation for compensation is to be made as at the vesting date; market value in good order may be reduced by contemporaneous estimated repair/refurbishment costs and by a reasonable allowance for purchaser profit/risk where substantial works are required.
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 indicated that pre‑vesting contractor quotations carry limited weight if they pre‑date the valuation date, lack clear specifications or independent verification, and that actual post‑possession refurbishment costs can be relevant to testing the reasonableness of earlier cost estimates.
Warning
- The chunk repeats large sections of text verbatim; care needed to avoid double‑counting. Notes include repeated text and may not represent the full judgment.