C A TROTT (PLANT HIRE) LIMITED v BRIAN HUMBLE PATRICIA MARY HUMBLE BASIL DEREK WESTLEY CHRISTINE MURIEL TURNER WESTLEY PETER JOHN GLIBBERY MARGARET DALLY GLIBBERY
Decision date: 29 October 2012
Neutral citation: [2012] UKUT 391 (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 is an appeal by a freeholder against an LVT decision fixing premiums for three lease extensions of flats with onerous 25‑year rent‑review provisions. The Upper Tribunal rejected complaints of procedural unfairness about reliance on material from another case and exclusion of late evidence, and upheld the LVT's valuation approach (including a 10% and a further 30% discount and a 7% capitalisation rate). The tribunal concluded the 30% discount for market effect of the rent‑review provisions was a permissible and reasonable adjustment and did not amount to impermissible double counting. The appeal was dismissed.
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
A tribunal may rely on its own knowledge to test expert evidence but must base decisions on evidence before it and give parties an opportunity to comment; exclusion of late evidence is a discretionary exercise not vitiating a decision absent substantial prejudice. Valuation reductions for lease disabilities can be reflected by discrete discounts and/or reflected in the capitalisation rate, and applying both does not necessarily constitute double counting where supported by expert opinion and reasoning.
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 is entitled to expect expert witnesses to disclose material transactional evidence in reports or joint discussions rather than first by oral submission at hearing. Also, the mere existence of a sale with a ground rent is not conclusive that the market ignored the defect unless the sale price demonstrates absence of a discount for it.