Examination of Witnesses (Questions 240
- 259)
240. MR MOULD: You have been a surveyor
for some 38 years, is that correct?
(Mr Smith) Correct.
241. MR MOULD: You practise in the firm
of Colin Smith Associates Limited.
(Mr Smith) Yes.
242. MR MOULD: And your firm is presently
retained by Crossrail London Links Limited to advise in relation
to property matters as regards the Crossrail scheme.
(Mr Smith) That is correct.
243. MR MOULD: Including, amongst other
things, matters relating to compulsory acquisition, land compensation,
land disposal and arrangements for over-site development.
(Mr Smith) Yes.
244. MR MOULD: Before you entered private
practice you were for some ten years, from 1993, Director of Property
at London Transport.
(Mr Smith) Yes, that is correct.
245. MR MOULD: And you had been employed
within London Transport since 1979.
(Mr Smith)
Yes.
246. MR MOULD: In the course of your
time with London Transport you dealt with a number of railway
bills in Parliament relating to London, including the Jubilee
Line, the Jubilee Line Extension, the Docklands Light Railway,
the Piccadilly Line Extension to Heathrow and the extension to
embrace Terminal 4, and the London Transport Safety Measures Bill,
is that correct?
(Mr Smith) Yes, that is correct.
247. MR MOULD: Is it right that in the
course of acting in relation to those Bills you gave expert evidence
to this House and to committees in the other place on matters
relating to compulsory purchase and land compensation?
(Mr Smith)
Yes, that is correct.
248. MR MOULD: As regards your experience,
it is fundamentally concerned with advising on property matters
in relation to railways and transport undertakings in London.
(Mr Smith)
Yes.
249. MR MOULD: In addition to your work
with Crossrail London Links Limited you are retained by Transport
for London to act as an expert witness in relation to the proposed
Victoria Station upgrade which is to be the subject of a Transport
and Works Act proposal.
(Mr Smith)
Yes, that is correct.
250. MR MOULD: Thank you very much indeed,
Mr Smith. My Lord, what I propose to do is I shall provide a very,
very brief summary of the basic legal provisions which I suspect
certainly yourself—
251. CHAIRMAN: The Land Compensation
Schemes?
252. MR MOULD: Exactly, yes. Then I am
going to hand over very quickly indeed to Mr Smith who is going
to explain how the Crossrail Bill and the Crossrail scheme more
generally embrace the land compensation provisions set out in
the statutes and give some practical illustrations and guidance
in relation to land compensation and the emerging proposals.
253. CHAIRMAN: This presentation will
be available to everybody as well, will it?
254. MR MOULD: It will indeed, yes. If
we can have slide 2, please.[1]
This is a summary of the topics that we are going to cover over
the course of the next hour or so. We are going to touch on cases
where the whole land interest is acquired for the purposes of
the scheme, cases where only part of a property interest is acquired,
then turn to cases where no land is acquired in the context of
the construction phase of the railway, then deal with cases which
relate to neighbouring property affected by the operation of the
railway once it has been completed, then turn to cases of temporary
acquisition, then just summarize the Promoters' land acquisition
and disposal policies and, finally, turn to touch on blight and
our hardship policy to finish off the presentation.
255. The next slide, please.[2]
This slide sets out the over-arching policy of what we call the
National Compensation Code. We draw out these principles. Firstly,
the Code provides a consistent approach to the payment of fair
compensation for land acquisition. The principle is commonly described
as one of equivalence and we have quoted a very well known passage
from a decision of Lord Justice Scott in the Court of Appeal in
a case called Horn v Sunderland Corporation where he put
it this way, that the aim "Gives to the owner compelled to
sell ... compensation—the right to be put, so far as money
can do it, in the same position as if his land had not been taken
from him." In a much more recent case in the House of Lords
Lord Nicolls summarised matters in the happy phrase that the objective
is to provide "the fair financial equivalent" of the
land compulsorily acquired.
256. The other point we would wish to draw out
is that, so far as procedure is concerned, a landowner who has
his land taken for the purposes of the scheme is ultimately entitled
to an independent and impartial assessment of the compensation
to which he claims to be entitled by the specialist tribunal set
up for that purpose, which is the Lands Tribunal.
257. CHAIRMAN: Is there still a Lands
Tribunal? I do not think there is.
258. MR MOULD: There is, yes. There are
on-going discussions as to precisely where it will fit into the
new tribunal framework.
259. CHAIRMAN: It is the first stage.
1 Crossrail Ref: P6, Teach In-Land Compensation Aspects
(LINEWD-XR3-002) Back
2
Crossrail Ref: P6, Introduction -The National Compensation Code
(LINEWD-XR3-003) Back
| 
