Search results

In the UK over the last 20 years there has been a proliferation in the statutory provisions for wayleaves. The utilities requiring wayleaves such as the water, gas and electricity companies have now been joined by cable TV and a host of telecommunications providers. All have access to compulsory powers. However, there are variations between these powers and between the compensation arrangements. The main objective of this article is to examine whether the compensation arrangements are now appropriate, following the privatisation of the gas, electricity, water and telecommunication companies. The article considers the results of a six‐month study of wayleaves funded by the RICS, which was completed in 2000, and recommends that, in order to strike a fair balance between the interests of the utilities and the landowners, legislative change is required. Claimants should not merely be entitled to the financial equivalent of their loss, but instead a consideration should be paid reflecting, in effect, a rental for the wayleave.

This paper examines the measure of compensation payable for electricity wayleaves through afforestation and considers the merits of using a discounted cash flow approach to calculate the level of compensation. The research finds that the majority of negotiations take place “under the shadow” of compulsory powers and that the measure of compensation is based on the principle of equivalence; the compensation payable being the loss to the landowner and not the gain to the electricity supply company. It concludes that great caution is needed when applying a discounted cash flow approach to the valuation of afforestation owing to the large number of inputs and the sensitivity of the estimated land value to changes to key variables such as the discount rate and tree species.

Examines the purpose of compensation for compulsory acquisition using the distinction drawn by Denyer‐Green between pretium and compensatio. Reports on the findings of a study by the authors of compensation settlements for business loss following a city centre redevelopment. Finds that the majority of the claimants in the study were dissatisfied with their settlement and all were dissatisfied with the process leading to the settlement. Concludes that the settlements tend towards compensatio rather than pretium. Suggests that a number of changes to the compensation arrangement should be considered to alleviate hardship for claimants.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an update on the work of the Scottish Government in modernising the Scottish compulsory purchase system by publishing two fresh circulars to guide acquiring authorities and a number of other measures short of legislation. It is anticipated that this will be the first stage in a programme which will be followed by an examination of primary legislation by the Scottish Law Commission in its eighth programme of law reform.

The paper explains the current Scottish system with a brief historical review, comments on the new circulars and the intentions and aspirations that lie behind them.

The Scottish compulsory purchase system has not had the revisions of 1965 and 2004 implemented by its English neighbour. It still relies on the original 1845 legislation and circulars issued in 1976 and 1992. The new circulars are helpful to acquiring authorities, particularly those who use the system infrequently and are a useful updating and reference source for professional practitioners.

This is a professional paper designed to draw attention to two new circulars and the policy thinking and aspirations underpinning them.

Compulsory purchase processes strike the delicate balance between the private property rights of individuals and corporations, and the needs of the community to obtain and use land that may lie in private ownership. The paper introduces two circulars that affect that balance.

The paper introduces the new compulsory purchase circulars to practitioners undertaking compulsory purchase work and to those academics involved in this discipline.