The court found no improper pressure or bias, despite shortcomings in JLL’s work.
The High Court has upheld a JLL property valuation that triggered a contractual “Cash Trap Event”, despite finding that the valuation work could have been substantially better.
Mr Justice Robin Knowles ruled that the valuation of the Tour des Finances office building in Belgium met the requirements of the parties’ Amended Facilities Agreement (AFA). He rejected claims by the property owner, Tour des Finances NV GVBF, that CBRE Loan Services Limited and lenders had improperly influenced JLL to produce a sufficiently low valuation to trigger the cash trap.
The dispute concerned the value of the property, which is primarily occupied by the Belgian federal government. The property was acquired for more than €1.2 billion and is financed under the AFA. The agreement provides for rental income to be diverted into a Cash Trap Account if the property’s loan-to-value ratio exceeds a specified level.
JLL was instructed in March 2026 to provide the contractual valuation. Its initial calculation put the property’s value at approximately €920 million. Earlier figures from other valuers had been significantly higher, including a €1.071 billion indication from Knight Frank and an indicative €1.069 billion assessment from Colliers.
[s-n-newsletter]
Tour des Finances alleged that the defendant and lenders had interfered with JLL’s work and that JLL was not independent. The court accepted that CBRE expected a valuation of €950 million or less, which would trigger the Cash Trap Event, and that one or more lenders wanted that outcome. However, the judge found that this did not establish improper pressure or instruction.
The court concluded that JLL had not lost its independence and was not biased. It also rejected the argument that apparent bias, without actual bias, was enough to invalidate the valuation in this case.
The judge was nevertheless critical of aspects of JLL’s work. He found shortcomings in the valuation process, including a cursory discounted cash flow cross-check and an unexplained failure to address some points raised on the draft report. But those shortcomings did not amount to dishonesty, bad faith, impropriety or bias, and did not prevent the report from qualifying as a “Valuation” under the AFA.
The court also considered evidence concerning Knight Frank, which had resigned as valuer in January 2026 after raising concerns about questioning and pressure during its valuation process. The judge did not find that its resignation had been caused by the alleged interference.
The court ultimately held that the Cash Trap Event had occurred and that JLL’s valuation satisfied the contractual definition. Tour des Finances therefore failed in its claim against CBRE Loan Services Limited.