No right to compensation for temporary noise along the E18
Supreme Court judgment 26 September 2024, HR-2024-1717-A, (case no. 23-186094SIV-HRET), civil case, appeal against Borgarting Court of Appeal's reappraisal 13 September 2023.
The case concerned compensation for expropriation along the E18 in Bærum.
The first question was whether the owners of several properties along Sandviksveien were entitled to compensation for reduced sales value for temporary noise nuisance linked to the development of the E18.
The Supreme Court concluded that a temporary reduction in value, viewed in isolation, should not be considered to reflect any economic loss according to section 9 of the Neighbour Act. It is only if the property is sold or the reduction in value is actually realised in another way - within the period for the temporary reduction in value - that a relevant financial loss may occur. If the owner stays with the property until the disadvantages are gone, the financial position will be the same as before the disadvantages occurred. The Court of Appeal's reappraisal is set aside on this point.
One justice dissented and held that the landowners have suffered a financial loss that corresponds to the reduced sales value that the noise nuisance has caused to their property, as the Court of Appeal had calculated the loss. Even in the case of temporary disadvantages, there is no requirement that the property be sold for a financial loss to occur.
The second question was whether, when calculating the compensation for the disposal of parts of another property, in Markalleen, a deduction should be made from the compensation because the remaining property will be more attractive when the road project is completed around 2030.
The decisive factor was whether the Court of Appeal had made an individual assessment of the special advantage. The Supreme Court agreed unanimously that this was the case, and dismissed the appeal on this point.
Read the judgment from the Supreme Court (Norwegian only) (PDF)
Area of law: Expropriation law, sections 2, 9 and 10 of the Neighbour Act, sections 8 and 9 of the Expropriation Compensation Act
Key paragraphs: 46–48, 54, 72–74
Justices: Indreberg, Matheson, Falch, Høgetveit Berg, Sivertsen