David Trevor Fisk v Suffolk County Council

Compensation under Part I of the Land Compensation Act 1973 is confined to depreciation caused by specified physical factors arising from the use of public works. The compensable loss is assessed by comparing the property’s market value with those factors present against its hypothetical value with them absent, while leaving other features of the development unchanged. The assessment must reflect the use existing at the first claim day and reasonably expected intensification in the works’ then-existing state. Non-physical disadvantages, such as loss of view, amenity or convenience, are excluded. Small market effects may be assessed by estimating the round-sum discount a purchaser would seek. On the evidence, all-night artificial lighting and traffic noise caused a depreciation of £10,000.

The claimant, a joint owner of a dwelling in Brantham, Suffolk, referred a claim against the respondent highway authority for compensation under Part I of the Land Compensation Act 1973. A 40-metre spur of Pioneer Way had been constructed behind the property to serve a housing development. At the agreed valuation date, the road was used by construction traffic and street lighting operated throughout the night. The claimant relied on artificial lighting, noise and pollution, and sought £35,000.

The respondent accepted entitlement but relied on valuation evidence assessing compensation at £2,000. The central issues were the correct hypothetical comparison, the physical factors properly attributable to the highway, the relevance of expected future use and the amount of depreciation.

1. Entitlement and statutory scope. The claim fell within Part I of the Land Compensation Act 1973. The qualifying physical factors included artificial lighting, noise and fumes caused by use of the highway. Compensation was limited to depreciation caused by those factors. Loss arising from other aspects of the development, including loss of view, outlook, amenity or convenience, was excluded.
2. Valuation method. Compensation was assessed by comparing the property’s actual market value with the physical factors present—the “switched on” value—with its hypothetical market value assuming those factors absent—the “switched off” value. All other circumstances of the development remained in the hypothetical valuation. The Tribunal assessed the switched off value at £400,000, giving greatest weight to comparable sales within the same estate.
3. Relevant circumstances. The assessment was made at 1 September 2021. The purchaser was taken to know that the road would be used by construction traffic for several years and that the development would eventually intensify. A future switch to part-night lighting could reasonably have been expected, but its timing was uncertain. The acoustic fence was a later response to the claim and would not have been expected by a purchaser at the valuation date.
4. Depreciation. The all-night lighting behind the property was particularly intrusive. Traffic noise was less unusual but remained a factor in the purchaser’s assessment. The evidence did not permit precise quantification, so the appropriate approach was to estimate the round-sum discount a purchaser would seek. The Tribunal assessed that discount at £10,000, representing 2.5 per cent of the switched off value.
5. Order. Compensation of £10,000 was awarded under the Act.