Closes 31 Mar 2025
This service needs cookies enabled.
We provisionally propose that compensation for a compulsory purchase of land should no longer be regarded as a “single global figure”. Compensation should be assessed in accordance with each of the four heads of compensation. In particular, it should be made clear in legislation that compensation for disturbance (and any other matter not directly based on the value of land) is a separate and distinct head of compensation, not part of the value of the land acquired.
Do consultees agree?
For more information relevant to this question, see paragraphs 6.7 to 6.13 of our consultation paper.
We invite consultees’ views as to whether or not the principle of equivalence ought to be given statutory expression in any newly codified and consolidated compulsory purchase legislation.
For more information relevant to this question, see paragraphs 6.15 to 6.22 of our consultation paper.
We provisionally propose that, subject to any other rule to the contrary, the interests giving rise to a right to compensation are those in existence at the valuation date (rather than the date of the notice to treat). The nature and extent of those interests (eg what other interests they are subject to; the length of any unexpired term etc.) is to be taken as the nature and extent at that date.
For more information relevant to this question, see paragraphs 6.24 to 6.31 of our consultation paper.
We provisionally propose that section 4 of the Land Compensation Act 1961 (costs of proceedings in the Upper Tribunal) should be repealed without replacement.
For more information relevant to this question, see paragraphs 6.37 to 6.41 of our consultation paper.
