Bishopsgate Space Management Ltd and another v London Underground Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 2004 |
| Date | 2004 |
| Court | Lands Tribunal |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
16 cases
-
Penny"s Bay Investment Co Ltd v Director Of Lands
...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
...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
...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
...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
...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......