→ 3
672
it would not fairly and rightly assess the damage even if only Korally bound, and he recognised the loss of rents as a proper subject of claim for compensation.
The present Chief Justice of Hongkong, Sir F. T. Piggott, who sat as judicial assessor on the recent Enquiry stated that in his opinion the case falls within the principle given in "Gripp on Compensation" (4th Ed.) p. 128 and the owner is entitled to compensation for depreciation; and as to loss of rents, he states that silting occurred this is proper subject for compensation and may be awarded under the Ordinance.
He also states that in his opinion there was in this case a compulsory ejectment from the property which entitles us to the usual 10%, but only on the difference in value of the Property as a Marine Lot and as an Inland Lot; whereas Boyle & Waghorn give the 10% on the ascertained value of the Property.
4. Thus under the Ordinance as defined by Governor des Voeux who passed it; by Mr. C. A. Cripps, K.C.; and by the Courts of Law; I submit we are entitled to Compensation for the depreciation of the Property when converted into an Inland Lot by the Reclamation in front of it, and for Loss of Rents; and that this depreciation be deduced from the facts in evidence, which are as follow:-
a.
b.
c.
d.
The working account of Howard's Godowns from 1885 to 30th June 1898, audited by the Colonial Auditor, shewing the net rentals and cost of earning.
The statement of the loss of rents $25,142 from 1st January 1896 to 10th October 1899 when the property was sold shewing when depreciation commenced and when it ended.
The cost of Buildings $36,000
Governor des Voeux payment to us of $1,700 as the market value of 339 feet of the land in 1887, being a fraction over $5 per foot.
The offer of $300,000 made to me in writing for the Property in 1888; in reference to which it was stated by Council, at the Inquiry, that the Crown strongly objected to our bringing in oral evidence to prove it.