In compulsory acquisition compensation claims, the reasonableness of replacement property expenditure for the purpose of disturbance loss must be assessed by reference to the value of the acquired land as ultimately agreed or authoritatively determined, not by reference to the claimant's own valuer's valuation. A claimant who over-invests in replacement property based on an inflated valuation cannot recover the incidental costs (such as stamp duty) attributable to the excess expenditure. The marriage value concept applies to valuation of the lessor's interest as well as the lessee's interest, and the Tribunal may make a modest allowance where there is some (not merely speculative) prospect of merger.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 20 later cases that cite this judgment.