My Community Space v Ipswich Borough Council: Admn 5 Dec 2018

Appeal by case stated concerning liability orders for national non-domestic rates. The charity challenged the finding that its occupation of certain land had been a sham used to exempt its occupation from rating liability.
Held: The appeal failed.

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3313 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating, Charity

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.631220

Perrott v Bryant And Another: 5 May 1836

Where a bill was brought for the customary tithes of oysters, alleging the customary payment to be to the owners and occupiers of boats employed in the fishery, and usually moored within the parish, Held, that it was not necessary to make the dredgers for the oysters, who had no interest in the boats, but who shared in the profits of the oysters, parties to the bill. – Oyster dredgers agreeing to receive from the owners of the boats, who were their employers, a stipulated share of the profits arising from the sale of the oysters, held not to be co-adventurers with the owners. The circumstance that property situate on the sea-shore, between a sea-side town and the sea, has not been assessed to the poor’s rates of the parish in which the town is situate, is very slender evidence of the property not being within the parish.

Citations:

[1836] EngR 670, (1836) 2 Y and C Ex 61, (1836) 160 ER 312

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating, Agriculture, Land

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.315002

F Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 20: LT 17 Jan 2000

RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further discount to reflect absence of tenant competition – R.V. reduced from pounds 46,000 to pounds 39,500.

Citations:

[2000] EWLands RA – 20 – 1998

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 22 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 21 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .

Cited by:

See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 19 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.225560

F Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 21: LT 17 Jan 2000

RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further discount to reflect absence of tenant competition – R.V. reduced from pounds 46,000 to pounds 39,500.

Citations:

[2000] EWLands RA – 21 – 1998

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 22 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .

Cited by:

See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 20 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 19 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.225561

Brighton and Hove City Council v Brighton and Hove Justices and Hamdan: QBD 29 Jul 2004

Stanley Burnton J said that he had no doubt that the appropriate procedure for challenging decisions relating to liability orders is by way of case stated: ‘ the appropriate procedure to challenge the decision of the justices of 28 May 2003 was by appeal by way of case stated. This is the normal procedure for challenging errors of law by justices. It has a number of advantages, not the least of which is that the discipline of a case stated normally ensures that the High Court has before it a statement by the justices of the issues they had to decide, the evidence before them, their findings of fact and the reasons for their decision. If the case stated is defective (because, for example, the justices’ statement of their findings of fact is ambiguous), it may be remitted to them for amendment: see the Practice Direction to Part 52 at 52PD.76. The reasons of the justices in the present case are relatively informal, and do not include what I would expect to see in a case stated. Furthermore, in an appeal by way of case stated, this Court is able to make any order that the lower court might have made: see CPR Part 52.10 (1). The powers of this court on judicial review are more limited: it can quash the lower court’s order and order it to make another order only if that other order is the only one properly open to it.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Burnton

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1800 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKenya Aid Programme v Sheffield City Council Admn 22-Jan-2013
The claimant challenged a decision that it was liable for non domestic rates in respect of some commercial units, on the basis that the use by the charity was not itself charitable.
Held: ‘there is no reason for limiting the ambit of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Magistrates

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.200305

F Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 19: LT 17 Jan 2000

RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further discount to reflect absence of tenant competition – R.V. reduced from pounds 46,000 to pounds 39,500.

Citations:

[2000] EWLands RA – 19 – 1998

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 22 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 21 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
See AlsoF Cross and Sons Ltd v Spencer (VO) 20 LT 17-Jan-2000
RATING – annual value – valuation – 1990 and 1995 rating lists – car showroom in cul-de-sac in village outside Doncaster – comparables – whether discount for size and mixed age – appropriate discount for poor location and layout – whether further . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.225559

Lambeth Overseers v London County Council: HL 1897

The House was asked whether the county council, which owned and maintained a park under a power accorded by a local Act of Parliament, were in rateable occupation of it.
Held: Lord Halsbury said that: ‘there is no possibility of beneficial occupation to the county council; they are incapable by law of using it for any profitable purpose; they must allow the public the free and unrestricted use of it.’ A park dedicated in perpetuity has no occupier.
Lord Herschell said that the Committee of Management are ‘merely custodians . . to hold it and manage it for the use of the public’.

Judges:

Lord Halsbury LC, Lord Herschell

Citations:

[1897] AC 625

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBarkas, Regina (on The Application of ) v North Yorkshire County Council and Another SC 6-Mar-2014
The Court was asked as to the registration of a playing field as a ‘town or village green’. Local residents asserted that their use of the land, having been ‘as of right’ required the registration. They now appealed against rejection of that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Rating

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.543939

Vines Ltd v De Mauny (Valuation Officer): UTLC 20 Sep 2010

UTLC RATING – valuation – 2005 list – car showroom and premises – whether evidence of agreed rents and rating assessments nearby sufficient to arrive at accurate value for main space or whether evidence further afield more reliable – whether both showrooms on site to be valued at same rate – whether workshop and valet building of equal value – quantum – whether value to be adjusted to reflect masking – appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 322 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425241

Re Marriage Neave and Co: CA 1896

The court considered the liability for rates of a company’s receiver: ‘The argument that, because a receiver and manager is appointed, then ipso facto the company or persons carrying on business are turned out, is neither reasonable nor plausible. It is quite conceivable that these receivers might have performed all their duties without even seeing this property. They were to carry on business: they could have appointed a manager to carry on that business under them, to take his instructions from them. It might never be necessary for them to go near the property at all.’

Judges:

Rigby LJ

Citations:

[1896] 2 Ch 633

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRatford v Northavon District Council CA 1986
The reality of the agency of a receiver is reflected in the continuity, after the appointment of receivers, of the rateable occupation of the mortgagor through the agency of the receivers. The possession of an agent is to be attributed to that of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.198324

Dell (Valuation Officer) v Daya and Another: UTLC 7 May 2010

UTLC RATING – valuation – shops – 2005 rating list – disturbance to trade by roadworks agreed to have affected value – extent of rateable value reduction to reflect such disturbance – appeals allowed

Judges:

A J Trott FRICS

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 132 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.416745

Webster (Valuation Officer) v Yorkshire Water Services Ltd: UTLC 5 Oct 2009

UTLC RATING – exemption – sewer – screening and de-gritting plant at installation 2 km from treatment works – sewage pumped through tunnel – whether installation an accessory belonging to a sewer – where treatment commenced – held that treatment screening and de-gritting were part of treatment – held not exempt – appeal dismissed – Local Government Finance Act 1988 Sch 5 para 13(1)

Citations:

[2009] UKUT 199 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.415040

Allen (Valuation Officer) v English Sports Council and Another: UTLC 25 Sep 2009

UTLC RATING – valuation – National Sports Centre – contractor’s test – stage 5 allowance – improvement of facilities with pounds 10m lottery grant – whether deduction to be made for grant – held no allowance to be made – site liable to flood – allowance for this – VO’s appeal allowed in substantial part – ratepayer’s cross-appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2009] UKUT 187 (LC), [2009] RA 289

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.415023

O’Brien v Valuation Officer: LT 4 Sep 2006

LT RATING . . Alteration of rating list – advertisement hoardings – deletion – hereditament ceasing to exist – beneficial occupation – appeal dismissed – remitted to Valuation Tribunal to determine rateable value.

Citations:

[2006] EWLands RA – 39 – 2005 – SP

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.245457

Bradford (Valuation Officer) v Vtesse Networks Ltd: CA 28 Jan 2010

The company appealed against a finding that it was liable to non-domestic rates in respect of its network of fibre-optic cable.

Judges:

Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoValuation Officer v Vtesse Networks Ltd LT 24-Nov-2005
LT RATING – hereditament – telecommunications system consisting of ratepayer’s ‘own-build’ sections and optical fibres belonging to other operators and contained in cables of those other operators – contractual . .
At CA (1)Valuation Officer v Vtesse Networks Ltd LT 24-Nov-2005
LT RATING – hereditament – telecommunications system consisting of ratepayer’s ‘own-build’ sections and optical fibres belonging to other operators and contained in cables of those other operators – contractual . .
Appeal fromBradford (Valuation Officer) v Vtesse Networks Ltd LT 7-Nov-2008
LT RATING – valuation – 2000 list – local telecommunications network – comparables – whether valuation should be based on apportionment of assessment of much larger nationwide network – whether tone of list . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396375

Vitesse Networks Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v North West Wiltshire Magistrates Court: Admn 10 Dec 2009

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3283 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Non-Domestic Ratings (Collection and Enforcement) Local Lists Regulations 1989, Local Government Finance Act 1988

Citing:

CitedSunworld Limited v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council QBD 2000
The company faced a prosecution under the 1968 Act, in respect of a brochure. On conviction, the company asked the Crown Court to state a case for the Divisional Court. The Recorder refused as to two points, saying that they were decisions of fact . .

Cited by:

CitedSecerno Ltd and Others v Oxford Magistrates Court and Another Admn 19-Apr-2011
The applicants each sought judicial review of a decision of the magistrate that he did not have jurisdiction to decline to issue liability notices. They argued that the Council had failed to issue the required notices before placing the properties . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384054

Rwenpower Plc v Cooper (Valuation Officer): LT 23 Jun 2008

LT RATING – occupation – paramount occupation – hereditament – sports and social club on power station site – whether in separate hereditament or part of power station hereditament – held club not electricity undertaker in occupation – separate hereditament.

Citations:

[2008] EWLands RA – 58 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.270503

English Speaking Union Scottish Branches Educational Fund, Re Judicial Review: SCS 27 Oct 2009

Lord Bonomy set out the condition to be passed for a charities trading activities to be chartable for exemption from rating namely that the Court should look at the whole of the evidence before it and decide, on a broad basis, whether the premises were being used wholly or mainly for charitable purposes, so as to give content to the full expression ‘wholly or mainly used’.

Judges:

Lord Bonomy

Citations:

[2009] ScotCS CSOH – 139, [2010] RA 227

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

CitedKenya Aid Programme v Sheffield City Council Admn 22-Jan-2013
The claimant challenged a decision that it was liable for non domestic rates in respect of some commercial units, on the basis that the use by the charity was not itself charitable.
Held: ‘there is no reason for limiting the ambit of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Rating, Charity

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.377245

Watts v Preston City Council: Admn 27 Apr 2009

The appellant said that the Valuation Tribunal had erred in law in determining that he was liable for Council Tax on a property.

Judges:

Langstaff J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2179 (Admin), [2009] RA 334

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government Finance Act 1992 8, Council Tax (Liability for Owners) Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.374372

Field Place Caravan Park Ltd v Harding: CA 1966

The Court considered the rateability of a residential caravan site. The caravans were on wheels and retained their mobility although they were jacked up to keep them stable.
Held: Although a chattel is not a rateable hereditament by itself, it may become rateable together with land, if it is placed on a piece of land and enjoyed with it in such circumstances and with such a degree of permanence that the chattel with the land can together be regarded as one unit of occupation.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘the correct position today is that, although a chattel is not a rateable hereditament by itself, nevertheless it may become rateable together with land, if it is placed on a piece of land and enjoyed with it in such circumstances and with such a degree of permanence that the chattel with the land can together be regarded as one unit of occupation.’

Judges:

Denning MR, Dankworths, Salmon LJJ

Citations:

[1966] 2 QB 484

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedLondon County Council v Wilkins (Valuation Officer) HL 1957
Four builders’ moveable huts, which had been erected as temporary structures on a site for 18 months, only one of which was moved from one part of the site to the other during that period, were claimed chattels and therefore not rateable.

Cited by:

CitedCinderella Rockerfellas Ltd v Rudd (Valuation Officer) CA 11-Apr-2003
The taxpayer appealed against a rating assessment on a barge permanently moored at a riverbank. He claimed that as a chattel, it should not be rated.
Held: The vessel was a chattel, but its occupation could be an occupation of the riverbed. . .
CitedReeves (Listing Officer) v Northrop Admn 6-Mar-2012
The respondent occupied a tugboat with his family as his home. The appellant authority had sought to charge council tax, saying that it was a dwelling. The boat was not a houseboat but a live-aboard seagoing vessel, registered in the Small Ships . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.181039

Westminster City Council v Woodbury (Valuation Officer) and the Yard Arm Club Ltd: CA 1 Nov 1992

A vessel, the Hispaniola was firmly fixed to moorings. The Council appealed a finding that it was exempt from inclusion in the rating list by the Act.
Held: The court found difficulty in the idea of lateral occupation by a chattel, or that occupation by a chattel was the right test, but even if it did, the occupation of the land was exempted under the Act. Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[1992] RA 1, [1992] RV 1, [1991] EGLR 173

Statutes:

Port of London Act 1968 178(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromWoodbury (Valuation Officer) v The Yard Arm Club Ltd LT 1989
A vessel, The Hispaniola, was moored in the river to two steel piles called dolphins fore and aft, each embedded in the riverbed. The vessel was connected to the dolphins by steel horns which permitted it to rise and fall with the tide but prevented . .

Cited by:

CitedCurzon Berkeley Ltd, Regina (on Application of) v Bliss (Valuation Officer, London Westminster Group Inland Revenue) Admn 19-Dec-2001
The appellant sought to challenge rating entries in the non-domestic rating list, by way of judicial review. The application was out of time, but proceeded as a substantial review. The applicant said the entries were incurably defective in that they . .
CitedChelsea Yacht and Boat Club Ltd v Pope CA 6-Apr-2000
The tenant sought to assert that he occupied a houseboat, the Dinty Moore, under a tenancy of a dwellinghouse under the 1988 Act. The claimant appealed a decision that it was.
Held: A house-boat, even though used as a dwelling, did not have . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.181046

Kenya Aid Programme v Sheffield City Council: Admn 22 Jan 2013

The claimant challenged a decision that it was liable for non domestic rates in respect of some commercial units, on the basis that the use by the charity was not itself charitable.
Held: ‘there is no reason for limiting the ambit of the phrase in the way contended for by the Appellant. As was pointed out in the English Speaking Union case and again in argument before us, the Appellant’s construction would substitute the word ‘solely’ for the word ‘wholly’. I see no reason why the statute should be thus narrowly confined. The natural reading and meaning of the words used, are, in my judgment, apt to cover not only consideration of the purpose of the use, but also the extent or amount of the actual use. It follows therefore that I would hold that the judge was right to take account of and place weight upon the extent to which the premises were used.’ However the district Judge’s decision could not be sustained: ‘ he took into account other factors which he should not have or which he did not analyse sufficiently.’ . . And ‘Whilst the judge was entitled to have regard to the English Speaking Union case and to look at the whole of the evidence before him and decide on a broad basis whether the premises were being used wholly or mainly for charitable purposes, and whilst the judge was correct to take into account the extent to which the premises were used, he also wrongly took account of other factors.’

Judges:

Treacy LJ, King J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 54 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 23, [2013] 3 WLR 422, [2013] 2 EGLR 138, [2014] 1 QB 62, [2013] RA 75, [2013] WLR(D) 23

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement)(Local Lists) Regulations 1989, Local Government Finance Act 1988 43(6), Rating (Empty Properties) Act 2007

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMakro Properties Limited v Nuneaton and Bedworth BC Admn 2012
A minor use will constitute rateable occupation for the purposes of liability to occupied rates. . .
CitedEnglish Speaking Union Scottish Branches Educational Fund, Re Judicial Review SCS 27-Oct-2009
Lord Bonomy set out the condition to be passed for a charities trading activities to be chartable for exemption from rating namely that the Court should look at the whole of the evidence before it and decide, on a broad basis, whether the premises . .
CitedGage v Wren 1903
. .
CitedWynn v Skegness UDC 1967
. .
CitedGlasgow Corporation v Johnstone and Others (orse Johnstons) HL 1965
A house lived in by a church officer was occupied for rating purposes by the church’s congregational board which employed him, and so was not liable for full rates. Lord Hodson said: ‘The distinction is usually shortly stated in this way: if the . .
CitedOxfam v Birmingham City District Council HL 1976
The appellant charity had the relief of poverty as its main object, a recognised ‘charitable purpose’. It operated gift shops used for sorting and selling donated articles of clothing as well as selling products made in the developing world. All of . .
CitedWestminster City Council v O’Reilly and others CA 1-Jul-2003
The defendant sought to appeal against a decision of the High Court on a case stated by the Magistrates.
Held: A decision by the High Court on an appeal by way of case stated from the Magistrates was final, and no further appeal lay to the . .
CitedFarley v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (No 2) CA 22-Jun-2005
The Court of Apeal had previously considered an appeal from the grant of a liability order made by magistrates. It had become clear that the order had been made without jurisdiction.
Held: The order must be set aside. The court had no . .
CitedRevenue and Customs Commissioners v Berriman QBD 2008
The Court permitted parallel case stated and Judicial Review proceedings to take place before it. . .
CitedRegina (Magon) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham CA 7-May-1998
Mummery LJ refused permission to seek Judicial Review on the ground that the case stated procedure is the appropriate one available to question the correctness of a liability order made by the Magistrates’ Court. . .
CitedBrighton and Hove City Council v Brighton and Hove Justices and Hamdan QBD 29-Jul-2004
Stanley Burnton J said that he had no doubt that the appropriate procedure for challenging decisions relating to liability orders is by way of case stated: ‘ the appropriate procedure to challenge the decision of the justices of 28 May 2003 was by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Charity

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.470484

Regina v Erewash Borough Council and Ilkestone Justices ex parte Smedberg and Smedberg: 1994

Citations:

(1994) 34 RVR 60

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Barnet Justices ex parte Ribbans Admn 18-Jun-1997
The applicant was an elderly illiterate lady. The magistrates had found that she had culpably neglected to pay her community charge. A suspended sentence of imprisonment was first imposed, and then effected in her absence. Held the Magistrates were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.179856

Re CIP Lounges at Heathrow Airport: LT 16 Mar 2009

RATING – valuation – value of lounges at Heathrow airport following events of 11 September 2001 in New York – claimed effects on passenger numbers and aircraft movements – whether matters physically manifest in locality – VT holding that they were though masked by other factors and reducing RVs – held VT wrong to conclude masked effects were manifest – Local Government Finance Act 1988 Sched 6 para 2(7)(d).

Citations:

[2009] EWLands RA – 59 – 2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government Finance Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.341635

Gyton v Palmour: 1944

Citations:

[1944] 1 KB 426

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRatford v Northavon District Council CA 1986
The reality of the agency of a receiver is reflected in the continuity, after the appointment of receivers, of the rateable occupation of the mortgagor through the agency of the receivers. The possession of an agent is to be attributed to that of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.198326

Saunders v Maltby (VO): CA 1976

The landlord’s repair obligation in the statutory provision did not extend to uneconomic repairs which were disproportionate to the value of the property; instead the landlord would let the property at a lower rent.

Citations:

(1976) 19 RRC 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.640537

Benjamin v Anston Properties Ltd: LT 1998

Because, under the 1988 Act, the hypothetical tenant bore the obligation to repair, the rental value of the hereditament would be adversely affected by a state of disrepair,

Citations:

[1998] 2 EGLR 147

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.640541

Hounslow London Borough Council v Rent Audio Visual Ltd and Bryant (VO): 1970

Citations:

[1970] RA 535

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.640540

Camden London Borough Council v Langford: CA 1980

Eveleigh LJ distinguished between repairs needed to make good decay, which fell within the hypothetical landlord’s repair obligation, and structural work on reinforced concrete columns and beams to preserve the stability and duration of the building, which went beyond repair and rendered the building unlettable.

Judges:

Eveleigh LJ

Citations:

[1980] RA 369

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.640535

Paynter (VO) v Buxton: LT 1986

The Tribunal upheld a nil valuation of two flats on the first and second floors of a terraced house in London which, along with the third floor flat, were undergoing a programme of refurbishment works, which were progressing from the top down. At the relevant time, there were extensive alterations to the third floor flat, which had been valued at nil and was not the subject of appeal, but lesser activity in the other flats in which there had been some re-plastering, some sanitary ware had been removed, some floorboards lifted and skirting boards and a door had been removed. The Lands Tribunal accepted evidence that a programme of alterations on the three floors was being carried out on all three flats and concluded that the works amounted to ‘alteration and modernisation’ and not repair.

Citations:

[1986] RVR 132

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.640538

Wexler v Playle (VO): CA 1960

The statutory hypothesis was that the reasonable landlord, when contracting with the tenant for the let of a dwelling house, undertook to put the property in repair and would do so by removing ‘readily remediable defects’ or ‘reparable and temporary defects’. Thus the existence of such defects in the property did not affect its value for rating purposes.

Judges:

Wilmer LJ, Harman LJ

Citations:

[1960] 1 QB 217

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.640536

Ravenseft Properties Ltd v Newham London Borough Council: CA 1976

The Court considered an appeal by the owners of offices, which were in the course of erection, against completion notices under para 8 of Schedule 1 to the 1967 Act. The court held that the test for completion of a new building or an existing hereditament undergoing structural alteration was whether it was ready for occupation.
Lord Denning MR in the course of his judgment said that Easiwork had been correctly decided because the old valuation list, unless it was altered, continued to apply.
Bridge LJ, who had sat in the Easiwork appeal said: ‘It is clear that in a situation where an old existing hereditament has a valuation based on its occupiable value and is undergoing radical structural alterations, it can be the subject of a proposal for an alteration in the valuation list for, at all events, any substantial period when by reason of the alteration it is incapable of occupation. That seems to me to provide the answer to the problem of hardship to an owner which in the Divisional Court we felt could arise in the Easiwork case.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Bridge LJ

Citations:

[1976] QB 464

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedEasiwork Homes Ltd v Redbridge London Borough Council QBD 1970
The Court considered liability for a domestic rate during a period when a block of flats was being upgraded. Under paragraph 1 of schedule 1 to the General Rate Act 1967, where a relevant hereditament was unoccupied for a continuous period exceeding . .

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.640542

De Silva and Another v Davis (VO): 1983

Citations:

[1983] 1 EGLR 211

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.640539

Townley Mill (1919) Limited v Oldham Assessment Committee: KBD 1936

Lord Hewart CJ said: ‘When one turns to the Third Schedule of the [1925] Act, it is apparent that it enumerates that type of machinery and plant which is conveniently described in the case as motive machinery; it is the machinery without which the mill could not begin to work, as, for example, the generation of power, heating and cooling, lifts and elevators, railways, tramlines and tracks, and other things, the foundation of that which was to become the work of the mill. When the machinery and plant referred to in the Third Schedule are eliminated, what is left is the kind of machinery which is concisely described in this case as process plant and machinery, operative plant and machinery, working and manufacturing plant and machinery.’
and ‘ . . the effect of this [1925] Act, intended to be an Act beneficial to those interested in the carrying on of industry, was to get rid of all the doctrine of enhanced value and to lay it down that what is called process plant and machinery must henceforth be disregarded where the problem is to ascertain the rateable value of the hereditament where plant and machinery are used. It is nothing to the purpose, in my opinion, to say apart from the use of the machinery and plant, there may be buildings called warehouses which for other commercial purposes do store or keep dry machinery and plant. It is not to be said that they are not to be rated because they contain machinery and plant. Of course, that could not be said. We are concerned with the rating of a hereditament which contains machinery and plant for the purpose of the carrying on of the work in that hereditament. The statute, in my opinion, makes it quite plain that in such a case and for such purposes, process plant and machinery are to be excluded.’

Judges:

Lord Hewart CJ, Hawke, Lawrence JJ

Citations:

[1936] 1 KB 585

Statutes:

Rating and Valuation Act 1925 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At Divisional CourtTownley Mill (1919) Limited v Oldham Assessment Committee HL 1937
Section 24 of the 1925 Act was considered.
Held: The House re-instated the decision at divisional level. The court described the basis upon which a property was to be valued for rating purposes. Viscount Maugham said it concerned: ‘ a . .
CitedIceland Foods Ltd v Berry (Valuation Officer) SC 7-Mar-2018
Air System plant excluded from Rating value
The court was asked whether the services provided by a specialised air handling system, used in connection with refrigerated merchandise in the appellant’s retail store, are ‘manufacturing operations or trade processes’ for rating purposes.
CitedIceland Foods Ltd v Berry (Valuation Officer) CA 23-Nov-2016
The court was asked whether the air handling system used by Iceland Foods Limited in its retail store at Liverpool was plant or machinery ‘used or intended to be used in connection with services mainly or exclusively as part of manufacturing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.605770

Newbigin (Valuation Officer) v S J and J Monk (A Firm): CA 13 Feb 2015

Judges:

Arden, Davis, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 78, [2015] 1 WLR 4817, [2015] RA 93, [2015] 4 All ER 1014, [2015] WLR(D) 70

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromS J and J Monk (A Firm) v Newbigin (VO) UTLC 26-Feb-2014
UTLC RATING – alteration of rating list – material day – whether proposal was to correct inaccuracy in list on day of compilation (1 April 2010) or whether list inaccurate by reason of material change of . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.542615

Arbuckle Smith and Co Limited v Greenock Corporation: HL 1960

The appellants had purchased a building which they wished to use as a bonded warehouse. In order to obtain the necessary licence they were required to carry out works of upgrading and repair. The rating authority made a demand for ‘occupied’ rates for a period during which the works were being carried out but the building was not yet being used for its intended purpose.
Held: Entry by the appellants for the purpose of maintenance, repair or conversion did not constitute occupation.

Citations:

[1960] AC 813

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

CitedPall Mall Investments (London) Ltd v Gloucester City Council Admn 8-Jul-2014
The land-owner appealed by case stated against an assessment to unoccupied, non-domestic rate demands. The land-owner said that they were unoccupied through dilapidations and therefore exempt. They said that the court had wrongly disregarded their . .
CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.533872

Easiwork Homes Ltd v Redbridge London Borough Council: QBD 1970

The Court considered liability for a domestic rate during a period when a block of flats was being upgraded. Under paragraph 1 of schedule 1 to the General Rate Act 1967, where a relevant hereditament was unoccupied for a continuous period exceeding 3 months the owner should be rated as if the property was occupied. The ratepayer sought to imply into the clause a requirement that the property should be physically capable of occupation.
Held: The Court rejected this argument. Bridge J noted that paragraph 10 of schedule 1 provided that structural alteration of a building may render it no longer a hereditament liable to rates. It was therefore unlikely that the exemption should apply in the case of a property that was not being structurally altered to the effect contemplated by paragraph 10. Bridge J identified the mischief pursued by the Act, recognising the attractiveness of the argument that the true purpose of the legislation was to penalise property owners who, for the purposes of capital gain, kept their properties unoccupied for long periods when they might be providing useful accommodation. This property owner was, for the benefit of the community, attempting to upgrade domestic accommodation for occupation. However, Bridge J concluded that this was to a large extent counter-balanced by the rating authority’s argument that: ‘if the statute is to be construed so as to exclude liability under these provisions in respect of property which for the time being is incapable of occupation, it would open the door to widespread abuse in that it would be open to any property owner anxious to keep his property unoccupied for a substantial period of time simply to remove, say, the sanitary fittings and part of the plumbing in order to be able to say that the property was for the time being incapable of occupation.’

Judges:

Bridge J

Citations:

[1970] 2 QB 406

Statutes:

General Rate Act 1967

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPall Mall Investments (London) Ltd v Gloucester City Council Admn 8-Jul-2014
The land-owner appealed by case stated against an assessment to unoccupied, non-domestic rate demands. The land-owner said that they were unoccupied through dilapidations and therefore exempt. They said that the court had wrongly disregarded their . .
ApprovedRavenseft Properties Ltd v Newham London Borough Council CA 1976
The Court considered an appeal by the owners of offices, which were in the course of erection, against completion notices under para 8 of Schedule 1 to the 1967 Act. The court held that the test for completion of a new building or an existing . .
CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.533875

S J and J Monk (A Firm) v Newbigin (VO): UTLC 26 Feb 2014

UTLC RATING – alteration of rating list – material day – whether proposal was to correct inaccuracy in list on day of compilation (1 April 2010) or whether list inaccurate by reason of material change of circumstances occurring on or after 1 April 2010 – whether works to building part of ongoing scheme of refurbishment rendering it incapable of beneficial occupation or whether assumption of a state of reasonable (economic) repair meant no alteration to the list justified – rebus sic stantibus – appeal allowed in part – rateable value determined at andpound;1

Judges:

A J Trott FRICS

Citations:

[2014] UKUT 14 (LC), [2014] RA 195

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v S J and J Monk (A Firm) CA 13-Feb-2015
. .
At UTLCNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.522657

Northamptonshire Valuation Tribunal, Re an Appeal Against A Decision By: LT 21 Nov 2008

LT RATING – valuation – 2005 list – distribution warehouse – whether passing rent for appeal hereditament most reliable evidence or whether other rental and/or assessment evidence to be preferred – whether tone of the list established – valuation officer’s appeal allowed – RV increased from andpound;410,000 to andpound;470,000

Citations:

[2008] EWLands RA – 57 – 2007

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278639

General Nursing Council for England and Wales v St Marylebone Borough Council: HL 1959

The court considered how to decide whether the Council could claim exemption from rates.
Held: The court should restrict its consideration to the purposes as set out and not look to the actual activities. The relevant clause had as its main object the advancement of nursing and not the advancement of the nursing profession and the exemption as a charity was available.
Lord Keith of Avonholm said: ‘In my opinion, the only way by which the main objects of the Appellant Council can be ascertained is by looking at the objects as expressed in the Act. It is by the language used that Parliament has expressed its intention, and it is with the objects for which the Council was immediately and directly constituted that we are, in my opinion, concerned and not with the results of its activities at second or third hand.’

Judges:

Lord Keith of Avonholm, Lord Morton, Lord Somervell

Citations:

[1959] 2 WLR 308

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRoyal College of Nursing v Borough of St Marylebone CA 27-Oct-1959
The College sought exemption from rates in respect of a nurses’ home saying that its objects made it a charitable organisation. It was not conducted for profit, but appeared to have two main purposes.
Held: Each of the purposes must be . .
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Charity

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276468

Townley Mill (1919) Limited v Oldham Assessment Committee: HL 1937

Section 24 of the 1925 Act was considered.
Held: The House re-instated the decision at divisional level. The court described the basis upon which a property was to be valued for rating purposes. Viscount Maugham said it concerned: ‘ a hypothetical tenant and a hypothetical rent, but . . a real and concrete hereditament’. As to the legal background of the 1925 Act, he said: ‘The hypothetical tenant was assumed to be a tenant from year to year with a reasonable prospect of continuing in occupation; but the hypothetical rent which the tenant could give was estimated with reference to the hereditament in its actual physical condition (rebus sic stantibus), and a continuance of the existing state of things was prima facie to be presumed.’
Lord Russell of Killowen said: ‘The plant and machinery referred to in [section 24 of the 1925 Act] include plant and machinery whose function is, not to execute any manufacturing operation or trade process, but to generate and transmit power to, or to warm, or cool, or ventilate, or light, etc., the hereditaments in question. They may be conveniently called ‘motive plant and machinery,’ while manufacturing or trade process plant and machinery may be conveniently referred to as ‘process plant and machinery.’
and ‘The Lord Chief Justice . . thought that on the construction of s. 24 the matter was plain, and that on its clear language the object of the section was to get rid of the old doctrine that although machinery not forming part of a hereditament could not be rated, nevertheless the rateable value of a hereditament was to be enhanced by reference to the machinery which was in it, and which made it appropriate to the particular industry carried on therein. Under the section motive plant and machinery is to be deemed part of the hereditament which is being valued; as to process plant and machinery, no account is to be taken of its value with respect to the valuation of the hereditament.’

Judges:

Viscount Maughan, Lord Russell of Killowen

Citations:

[1937] AC 419

Statutes:

Rating and Valuation Act 1925 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Divisional CourtTownley Mill (1919) Limited v Oldham Assessment Committee KBD 1936
Lord Hewart CJ said: ‘When one turns to the Third Schedule of the [1925] Act, it is apparent that it enumerates that type of machinery and plant which is conveniently described in the case as motive machinery; it is the machinery without which the . .

Cited by:

CitedOrange PCS v Alan Roy Bradford (Valuation Officer) CA 17-Feb-2004
The claimant challenged the rating of the land it had used for the erection of a mobile ohone mast.
Held: Even though the company had the statutory right to place a mast in this location and without payment, for rating purposes the officer . .
CitedIceland Foods Ltd v Berry (Valuation Officer) SC 7-Mar-2018
Air System plant excluded from Rating value
The court was asked whether the services provided by a specialised air handling system, used in connection with refrigerated merchandise in the appellant’s retail store, are ‘manufacturing operations or trade processes’ for rating purposes.
CitedIceland Foods Ltd v Berry (Valuation Officer) CA 23-Nov-2016
The court was asked whether the air handling system used by Iceland Foods Limited in its retail store at Liverpool was plant or machinery ‘used or intended to be used in connection with services mainly or exclusively as part of manufacturing . .
CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.193769

R F Williams (Valuation Officer) v Scottish and Newcastle Retail Ltd Allied Domecq Retailing Ltd: CA 15 Feb 2001

When assessing the ratable value of premises, the value had to be determined with respect to the actual use made, and the value of the building in that use. The fact that a building was in an area where with a different use a much greater return could be achieved did not signify. The tribunal’s job was to assess the actual value, not some potential value.
Walker LJ said: ‘It is worth noting in passing that references to the ‘physical’ state or enjoyment of property in para 2(7)(a) and (d) represent a statutory reversal of the decision of the House of Lords in Addis Ltd v. Clement [1988] RA 25, a decision on s 20 of the 1967 Act.’

Judges:

Walker LJ

Citations:

Times 06-Mar-2001, Gazette 11-May-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 185, [2001] RA 41, [2001] 1 EGLR 157, [2001] 9 EGCS 227, [2001] NPC 46

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedClement (VO) v Addis Ltd HL 1988
The ratepayer complained that an enterprise zone set up near his property had depressed the value of his property which should have been reflected in a reduced rateable value. He appealed a decision that section 20 related only to physical changes . .

Cited by:

CitedChilton-Merryweather v Hunt and others CA 19-Sep-2008
The council tax payers sought to reduce the banding for his house saying that it was adversely affected in value by being located so close to the motorway as to be affected by noise.
Held: The House of Lords decision in Addis had been reversed . .
CitedNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ and J Monk (A Firm) SC 1-Mar-2017
The court was asked: ‘Does a commercial building which is in the course of redevelopment have to be valued for the purposes of rating as if it were still a useable office? ‘
Held: Appeal from decision of CA granted. On the facts found by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.147436

Gray, Regina (on the Application of) v Bristol City Council: Admn 3 Sep 2008

The taxpayer had been receiving jobseekers allowance. He received an award of damages for personal injury, and the respondent council suspended his housing benefit. He now sought judicial review of that decision. The council asked several silly questions about his circumstances. The council now said that the suspension had been temporary, and that the proceedings were unnecessary, and sought costs.
Held: Permission to bring a review was refused.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2212 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating, Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276534

Chilton-Merryweather v Hunt and others: CA 19 Sep 2008

The council tax payers sought to reduce the banding for his house saying that it was adversely affected in value by being located so close to the motorway as to be affected by noise.
Held: The House of Lords decision in Addis had been reversed by the 1988 Act, and ‘it would seem to me to be contrary to the policy of the 1992 Act to permit an alteration in the list for a reason which, although of course it manifests itself locally, is in truth part of a nationwide trend. If it were otherwise, then, what is intended to be a narrow and specific gateway designed to accommodate changes in the physical state of dwelling or locality becomes a nationwide opportunity to revalue (but always according to 1991 values) by reason of something which is happening throughout the land. ‘

Judges:

Waller, REix, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1025

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Local Government Finance Act 1992 24(10), The Council Tax (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993 32, Local Government Finance Act 1988 Sch 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAddis Ltd v Clement (VO) CA 1987
The ratepayer challenged the rateable value of his business premises. A business park had been erected within an enterprise zone nearby. Because properties in the enterprise zone were subsidised, the rental value of his own premises was reduced. It . .
CitedClement (VO) v Addis Ltd HL 1988
The ratepayer complained that an enterprise zone set up near his property had depressed the value of his property which should have been reflected in a reduced rateable value. He appealed a decision that section 20 related only to physical changes . .
CitedR F Williams (Valuation Officer) v Scottish and Newcastle Retail Ltd Allied Domecq Retailing Ltd CA 15-Feb-2001
When assessing the ratable value of premises, the value had to be determined with respect to the actual use made, and the value of the building in that use. The fact that a building was in an area where with a different use a much greater return . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276402

In Re Kentish Homes Ltd: ChD 31 Mar 1993

The question was whether a post-liquidation liability to community charge on empty flats was an expense of the liquidation.
Held: The company was the chargeable person in respect of the flats for the relevant periods, but the liability was nevertheless not a liquidation expense. It would rank as such only if the court, as a matter of discretion, directed the liquidators to discharge the obligation out of the assets in their hands. There was however no ground upon which the court should do so.
Sir Donald Nicholls V-C said: ‘whether debts should count as expenses of the liquidation is a matter for the discretion of the court’

Judges:

Sir Donald Nicholls V-C

Citations:

Gazette 31-Mar-1993, [1993] BCLC 1375

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedIn re Atlantic Computer Systems Plc CA 1992
The chargor was a company which arranged with the chargee, a funding bank, that it should purchase equipment and let it on hire purchase to the chargor with permission to sub-lease to end users. The chargor charged to the chargee by way of security . .
CitedIn re Lundy Granite Co; Ex parte Heavan CA 1871
The landlord of Lundy Island, which was let to a third party, distrained upon goods of the company which had been left upon the tenant’s property. The distraint was for rent which had fallen due more than a year after the winding up order. The . .

Cited by:

CitedKahn and Another v Commissioners of Inland Revenue; In re Toshoku Finance plc HL 20-Feb-2002
A company went into liquidation, being owed substantial sums by another company in the same group, but itself insolvent. A settlement did not include accrued interest, but was claimed to be taxed as if it had, and on an accruals basis. If so, was . .
CitedIn re Nortel Companies and Others SC 24-Jul-2013
The court was asked as to the interrelationship of the statutory schemes relating to the protection of employees’ pensions and to corporate insolvency.
Held: Liabilities which arose from financial support directions or contribution notices . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Rating

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.81975

In re Watson, Kipling and Co: ChD 1883

An assessment for rates had been made after the liquidation of the company upon property occupied by the company. The court rejected the submission of counsel for the rating authority that: ‘where a liability is incurred during the winding-up, that liability ought to be paid in full, and therefore these rates ought to be paid in full because they were made during the winding-up.’ It was not enough that the company was in rateable occupation. It must have retained occupation for the benefit of the estate.

Judges:

Kay J

Citations:

(1883) 23 Ch D 500

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedIn re Lundy Granite Co; Ex parte Heavan CA 1871
The landlord of Lundy Island, which was let to a third party, distrained upon goods of the company which had been left upon the tenant’s property. The distraint was for rent which had fallen due more than a year after the winding up order. The . .

Cited by:

CitedKahn and Another v Commissioners of Inland Revenue; In re Toshoku Finance plc HL 20-Feb-2002
A company went into liquidation, being owed substantial sums by another company in the same group, but itself insolvent. A settlement did not include accrued interest, but was claimed to be taxed as if it had, and on an accruals basis. If so, was . .
CitedKahn and Another v Commissioners of Inland Revenue; In re Toshoku Finance plc HL 20-Feb-2002
A company went into liquidation, being owed substantial sums by another company in the same group, but itself insolvent. A settlement did not include accrued interest, but was claimed to be taxed as if it had, and on an accruals basis. If so, was . .
DisapprovedIn re National Arms and Ammunition Co CA 1885
‘If the company retains the possession of property which would be rateable in the hands of anyone else, it is only reasonable that it should be rateable in the hands of the company . . the true test is whether there has been a beneficial occupation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Rating

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.182551

Moss’s Empires Ltd v Walker and Others: HL 24 Oct 1916

The proprietors of property which had been entered in the valuation roll at an increased valuation brought in the Court of Session an action of reduction of the entry on the averment that the assessor had sent them no notice of the proposed change.
Held (1) that the Court of Session had jurisdiction, and (2) that the action was not incompetent under section 30 of the Valuation of Lands (Scotland) Act 1854, inasmuch as the defect alleged was not an ‘informality’ or a ‘want of compliance with the provisions of this Act in the proceedings for making up such valuation or valuation roll.’

Judges:

Earl Loreburn, Viscount Haldane, Lord Kinnear, Lord Shaw, and Lord Parmoor

Citations:

[1916] UKHL 12, House of Lords.
Tuesday, October 24. 1916.

(Before

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Rating

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.630690

Corkish (Vo) v Bigwood: UTLC 21 Jun 2019

Rating – Rateable Property – Whether Equestrian Facilities Domestic or Non-Domestic Property – whether equestrian facilities adjacent to a substantial country house were domestic or non-domestic property – whether they were an appurtenance belonging to or enjoyed with the house – section 66(1)(b), Local Government Finance Act 1988 – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 191 (LC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.639208