Bishopsgate Space Management Ltd and another v London Underground Ltd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Year2004
Date2004
CourtLands Tribunal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
16 cases
  • Penny"s Bay Investment Co Ltd v Director Of Lands
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 16 May 2016
    ...date (see Minister of Transport v Pettitt (1969) 20 P &CR 344 at 355, 359; Bishopsgate Space Management Ltd v London Underground Ltd [2004] 2 EGLR 175 at 142. In the assessment of the 2nd Before Value, the Tribunal did not include the three months’ rent and did not make any deferment of the......
  • Penny"s Bay Investment Co Ltd v Director Of Lands
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 16 May 2016
    ...date (see Minister of Transport v Pettitt (1969) 20 P &CR 344 at 355, 359; Bishopsgate Space Management Ltd v London Underground Ltd [2004] 2 EGLR 175 at 142. In the assessment of the 2nd Before Value, the Tribunal did not include the three months’ rent and did not make any deferment of the......
  • Penny"s Bay Investment Co Ltd v Director Of Lands
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 16 May 2016
    ...date (see Minister of Transport v Pettitt (1969) 20 P &CR 344 at 355, 359; Bishopsgate Space Management Ltd v London Underground Ltd [2004] 2 EGLR 175 at 142. In the assessment of the 2nd Before Value, the Tribunal did not include the three months’ rent and did not make any deferment of the......
  • Penny"s Bay Investment Co Ltd v Director Of Lands
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 16 May 2016
    ...date (see Minister of Transport v Pettitt (1969) 20 P &CR 344 at 355, 359; Bishopsgate Space Management Ltd v London Underground Ltd [2004] 2 EGLR 175 at 142. In the assessment of the 2nd Before Value, the Tribunal did not include the three months’ rent and did not make any deferment of the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Compulsory purchase and compensation update – 2016
    • United Kingdom
    • Emerald Journal of Property Investment & Finance No. 34-4, July 2016
    • 4 July 2016
    ...and urban development corporations.Review of the “Bishopsgate”principleThe case of Bishopsgate Space Management v. London Underground (2004) 2 EGLR175 considered compensation for disturbance for claimants who qualify under Section20 Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, i.e., claimants who have a m......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT