Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Ltd v Russell: HL 25 Nov 1999

Where an electricity supplier operated a waste plant to generate electricity, but still, the predominant use of the plant was for waste disposal, the rates were not to be calculated under the industry’s own special rules, but under those for the general rating of business premises. An explanatory note may be referred to as an aid to construction where the statutory instrument to which it is attached is ambiguous.
Lord Hope considered the meaning of the phrase ‘in connection with’ and said: ‘The majority in the Court of Appeal held that it was a sufficient answer to the appellant’s argument to construe the words ‘in connection with’ as meaning ‘having to do with’. This explanation of the meaning of the phrase was given by McFarlane J in Re Nanaimo Community Hotel Limited [1944] 4 D.L.R. 638. It was adopted by Somervell L.J. in Johnson v. Johnson [1952] P. 47, 50-51. It may be that in some contexts the substitution of the words ‘having to do with’ will solve the entire problem which is created by the use of the words ‘in connection with.’ But I am not, with respect, satisfied that it does so in this case, and Mr. Holgate did not rely on this solution to the difficulty. As he said, the phrase is a protean one which tends to draw its meaning from the words which surround it. In this case it is the surrounding words, when taken together with the words used in the 1991 Amending Order and its wider context, which provide the best guide to a sensible solution of the problem which has been created by the ambiguity.’
Lord Steyn Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Millett
Times 30-Nov-1999, Gazette 08-Dec-1999, [1999] UKHL 49, [1999] 1 WLR 2093, [2000] 1 All ER 97
House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii
Electricity Generators (Rateable Values) Order 1989 (1989 No 2474)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Montila and Others HL 25-Nov-2004
The defendants faced charges under the two Acts. They raised as a preliminary issue whether it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the property being converted was in fact the proceeds, in the case of the 1994 Act, of drug trafficking and, in . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc and Another v HM Revenue and Customs CA 11-May-2007
Retired bank employees had previously received free tax advice. When the service was withdrawn, the bank made a payment. The Revenue said that this payment was chargeable to income tax.
Held: The bank’s appeal failed. The payment was made ‘in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 January 2021; Ref: scu.159032