Clive Moys, instructed by David Draisey and Francesca Turner of Hunters LLP, appeared for the successful claimant on the hearing of a preliminary issue in its compensation claim: K and K Property Investments Ltd. v. Southwark L.B.C. [2026] UKUT 97 (LC).

Following the acquiring authority’s (“AA”) confirmed C.P.O. of land fronting Peckham Rye railway station, in 2020 it made a general vesting declaration of the order lands, including 78 Rye Lane, Peckham. The claimant was the registered proprietor of a long (under) leasehold estate in possession of 78 Rye Lane.

The issue concerned the AA’s challenge to the claimant’s compensatable interest (including the value of it), by its contention that because on the registration of a disposition of the concurrent leasehold estate in reversion in 1992, the claimant’s under lease was not noted in the charges register of the title to the concurrent lease, the owner of the concurrent lease acquired its interest “free” of the claimant’s estate.

The judgment is of general importance because it contains a detailed analysis and discussion of the meaning of the expression “the register” as used in the Land Registration Act 1925 [paras. 36-50].
The decision confirms both that the claimant had a compensatable interest in 78 Rye Lane on the vesting date, and that the open market value of its interest was not reduced by virtue on HM Land Registry’s mistake in failing to note the claimant’s lease on the title to the concurrent lease – caused by the title numbers to the various leasehold interests having changed.

You can access the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) decision here.