Error of law in expropriation case in Ås
Supreme Court judgment 28 May 2024, HR-2024-967-A, (case no. 23-164015SIV-HRET), civil case, appeal against Borgarting Court of Appeal's reappraisal.
The State represented by the Office of the Attorney General represented by Elisabeth Sawkins Eikeland) v. A, B, C, D (Counsel Tor Gresseth), Norskog (intervener), Norwegian Farmers' Union (intervener), Norwegian Farmers´Union (intervener) (Counsel Magnus Dæhlin)
In connection with expropriation from three agricultural properties, the Court of Appeal had used a capitalisation interest rate of 2.5 percent when calculating the value of use. The Court applied the regulated interest rate of 2.5 percent for capitalisation of personal injury compensation, stating that these interest rates correspond in practice. The Supreme Court noted that the regulated interest rate in personal injury cases was not fixed based on a changed interest level in society but rather from less strict requirements for the injured party’s duty to mitigate losses. It was therefore an error of law when the Court of Appeal did not consider more closely the duty to mitigate losses in connection with expropriation compared to personal injury, but instead relied directly on regulations. The Court of Appeal’s calculations of compensation were set aside.
Read the judgment from the Supreme Court (Norwegian only) (PDF)
Area of law: Ekspropriasjonsrett, ekspropriasjonserstatningsloven § 6.
Key paragraphs: 44, 48-49, 52-53
Justices: Øie, Bull, Bergh, Østensen Berglund og Sæther