Law Commission consultation on compulsory purchase

(Assuming that both the notice to treat and general vesting declaration procedures are retained) we provisionally propose that section 20 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 should be modified to make it consistent with the analogous provisions of the Compulsory Purchase (Vesting Declarations) Act 1981. In particular:

1. Section 20 of the 1965 Act should adopt the definitions of “minor tenancy” and “long tenancy which is about to expire” which appear in the 1981 Act; and
2. If the acquiring authority wishes to terminate such a tenancy before it is entitled to do so under the terms of the tenancy, it should be required to serve a notice to treat and a further notice requiring possession (as it is required to do by the 1981 Act).

Do consultees agree?

We provisionally propose that compensation for the compulsory acquisition of short tenancies should be assessed according to the same rules that apply to compensation for greater interests. The special compensation rules in section 20 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 should therefore be repealed.

Do consultees agree?

We provisionally propose to retain the provisions relating to mortgages and rentcharges in sections 14 to 18 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 (subject to restatement in modern language).  

Do consultees agree? 

We invite consultees views about whether any additional improvement should be made to the legislation regarding the process of acquiring new rights (aside from specific issues concerning compulsory acquisition of new rights that are addressed in other questions).

Unless otherwise specified in the power being used to compulsorily acquire a new right, we think that the assessment of compensation for such an acquisition should be consistent across acquiring authorities. We provisionally propose that where the interest acquired is a new right over land, compensation shall be assessed having regard to:

1. any depreciation in the market value of the land over which the right is acquired;
2. any depreciation in the market value of other land held with that land, caused by the acquisition of the right; and
3. any consequential loss (applying the principles of rule 6 of section 5 of the Land Compensation Act 1961, with appropriate modifications).

Do consultees agree?

We invite consultees’ views as to whether the power to override rights in sections 203 to 205 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 has given rise to any practical difficulties, including difficulties in interpretation. If so, please explain the facts and the nature of the difficulty. In particular, we seek views on:

1. how authorities have sought to establish that they “could acquire the land compulsorily” under section 203(2)(c); and
2. how parties have sought to assess compensation for overridden rights under section 204(2).