Emslie & Simpson Ltd v Aberdeen City District Council (No 2)

JurisdictionScotland
Date1995
CourtLands Tribunal (Scotland)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
13 cases
  • Decision Nº ACQ 447 2007. Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), 03-06-2009
    • United Kingdom
    • Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)
    • 3 June 2009
    ...expenses of doing so if he is successful in the general assertion of his right.’ [Emslie and Simpson Limited v Aberdeen District Council [1995] RVR 159]. … 36. … exaggeration alone is not enough in the event of a large disparity between the sum claimed and the sum awarded. The matters to wh......
  • Decision Nº LCA 21 2014. Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), 23-06-2015 , [2015] UKUT 0195 (LC)
    • United Kingdom
    • Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)
    • 23 June 2015
    ...& C.R. 1 Purfleet Farms Ltd v Secretary of State of Transport [2003] 1 P. & C.R. 20 Emslie & Simpson Limited v Aberdeen District Council [1995] RVR 159 Padfield v Eastern Electricity Board (1971) 24 P. & C.R. 423 West Midlands Joint Electricity Authority v Pitt [1932] 2 KB 1 Wildtree Hotels......
  • Harlow District Council v Powerrapid Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division
    • 17 March 2023
    ...its costs, whereas it would not lead to the same result in proceedings before the Lands Tribunal. In the case of Emslie & Simpson [ [1995] RVR 159] the Court of Session did not attempt to cite such an example; indeed, it made clear that it regarded the exercise of discretion by the Tribunal......
  • Purfleet Farms Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 15 October 2002
    ...23 Mr Barnes has referred us to the decision of the Court of Session of Scotland in Emslie & Simpson Limited v Aberdeen District Council [1995] RVR 159 as affording support for the approach which he advocates, albeit the judgments in that case made no reference to a doctrine of "equivalence......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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