HC Deb 13 July 1954 vol 530 cc358-60
The Attorney-General

I beg to move, in page 25, line 36 to leave out from "following," to the end of line 46, on page 26, and to insert: subsection, where a person is entitled to compensation under this Part of this Act in respect of the depreciation by a planning decision of the value of an interest in land to which the planning decision relates which at the time of that decision has an unexpended balance of established development value (in this section referred to as 'qualified land') the amount of the compensation shall be whichever is the less of the following amounts, that is to say—

  1. (a) the amount by which the value of the interest, or in the case of an interest extending to other land, the amount by which the value of the interest in so far as it subsists in qualified land, is depreciated by the decision; or
  2. (b) the amount of the unexpended balance of established development value immediately before the decision of the qualified land in which the interest subsists:
Provided that if compensation is payable under this Part of this Act in respect of two or more interests in the came qualified land by reason of the same planning decision and the aggregate amount of compensation payable apart from this proviso in respect of those interests exceeds the amount mentioned in paragraph (b) of this subsection, the amount so mentioned shall be allocated between those interests in proportion to the depreciation of the value of each of them respectively, and the amount of the compensation payable in respect of any of those interests shall be the sum so allocated to that interest. (2) Where the land to which the planning decision relates, taken as a whole, does not satisfy the following conditions, that is to say—
  1. (a) that the land is qualified land; and
  2. (b) that every interest subsisting therein the value of which is depreciated by the decision subsists in the whole thereof,
then, for the purposes of assessing the compensation payable under this Part of this Act in respect of any interest subsisting in that land or any part thereof—
  1. (i) the depreciation of the value of the interest by the planning decision shall first be ascertained with reference to the whole of the land to which the planning decision relates in which that interest subsists;
  2. (ii) the land to which the planning decision relates in which that interest subsists shall then be treated as divided into as many parts as may be requisite to ensure that each such part consists of land which either satisfies the conditions aforesaid or is not qualified land; and
  3. (iii) the depreciation of the value of the interest ascertained as aforesaid shall then be apportioned between the said parts according to the nature of those parts and the effect of the planning decision in relation to each of them,
and the amount of the compensation shall be the aggregate of the amounts which would he payable by virtue of the preceding subsection if the planning decision had been made separately with respect to each such part. I am afraid this is rather a complicated matter but I think it can be explained fairly briefly in view of what I have already said. This Amendment introduces a new Clause 21 which combines the functions of the present Clauses 21 and 27 and of subsection (4) of Clause 26. Clause 22 is abolished. In a reasonably small compass we are achieving a good deal and I hope we are making matters clearer than they were before.

The first part of the Amendment embodies the substance of the present Clause 21 with some very slight drafting improvements. The reference to the supplement of one-seventh now disappears because it is embodied in the unexpended balance.

The remainder of the Amendment deals with cases where two or more interests exist in the whole or part of the land which are depreciated by the planning decision. In that respect it replaces Clause 27. Lines 13 to 21 do the job previously done by subsection (2) of that Clause. They deal with the simple case where there are two or more interests in the same land. If the aggregate depreciation exceeds the unexpended balance, the balance is to be shared out proportionately.

The remainder of the Amendment deals with the more complicated cases where the areas in which the competing interests exist do not coincide. These are at present dealt with in separate subsections of Clause 27—subsections (3) and (4)—with the assistance of subsection (4) of Clause 26. These have all been combined here.

There is no change in the process. The land is to be broken down into areas, each of which has an unexpended balance and a uniform interest structure. The depreciation which is suffered by each of those interests is first to be assessed as a whole and then to be apportioned among these areas of uniform structure. The compensation payable will then be the total of the sums which would have been payable if each area had been the subject of a separate planning decision attracting the apportioned amount of compensation.

I hope that this will commend itself to the House as a simpler and more convenient arrangement, but I can assure hon. Members that there is no substantial change in the operation of the machinery.

Amendment agreed to.