Friday Law Report: Civil Procedure Rules Did Not Apply to Awards of Costs in Lands Tribunal ; 1 November 2002 Purfleet Farms Ltd V Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions ([2002] EWCA 1430) Court of Appeal, Civil Division (Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Chadwick and Mr Justice Wall) 15 October 2002

By Kate O'Hanlon, Barrister | The Independent (London, England), November 1, 2002 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Friday Law Report: Civil Procedure Rules Did Not Apply to Awards of Costs in Lands Tribunal ; 1 November 2002 Purfleet Farms Ltd V Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions ([2002] EWCA 1430) Court of Appeal, Civil Division (Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Chadwick and Mr Justice Wall) 15 October 2002


Kate O'Hanlon, Barrister, The Independent (London, England)


THE CIVIL Procedure Rules did not apply to proceedings before the Lands Tribunal. If, as a result of applying the principles of ordinary litigation to the hearing of references to determine the compensation payable on compulsory purchase, the tribunal adopted a practice of ready departure from the principle that the successful claimant was entitled to his costs in the absence of a special reason to the contrary, a change to the approach which had previously and properly been adopted in compensation reference cases would be involved.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant's appeal against costs awarded to it on the determination of compensation payable following the compulsory purchase of land.

Following the compulsory acquisition of certain land from the claimant, it applied to the Lands Tribunal for a determination of the amount of compensation payable. The award sought by the claimant was pounds 12,260,000. The defendant valued the compensation at pounds 3,750,000, but made a sealed unconditional offer of pounds 5,000,000. The tribunal determined the compensation at pounds 6,660,000, and ordered the defendant to pay three-quarters of the claimant's costs.

The tribunal took as its starting point in determining the costs the proposition that the claimant had been successful and should receive its costs, but held that all the circumstances should be taken into account, including whether the claim had been exaggerated. It held that, although the Civil Procedure Rules did not apply to proceedings before it, it should have regard to those rules where applicable, in particular with regard to the award of costs.

The claimant appealed against the award of costs, contending that it was clear from section 4(1) of the Land Compensation Act 1961 that a full award of costs should be made to a claimant whose award exceeded the sum offered unless there was "special reason" not to do so; and that, even if the general principles governing the award of costs in compensation references were similar to those set out in the CPR, they should be applied in a flexible manner which reflected the nature of the particular proceedings and in particular the rationale underlying awards of compensation in respect of compulsory purchase, namely "equivalence".

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Friday Law Report: Civil Procedure Rules Did Not Apply to Awards of Costs in Lands Tribunal ; 1 November 2002 Purfleet Farms Ltd V Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions ([2002] EWCA 1430) Court of Appeal, Civil Division (Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Chadwick and Mr Justice Wall) 15 October 2002
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?