Iceland 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.
Held: Iceland’s appeal was allowed and the decision of the First Tier Tribunal restored. The 2000 Regulations had not intended to alter the law: ‘ plant which is used in connection with ‘services to the hereditament’ may also be used in connection with ‘services . . as part of manufacturing operations or trade processes . . ‘. Viewed in this way, the key distinction lies in the main use to which the services are put: in connection with the hereditament, or with the processes within it.’
The rateable value of a non-domestic hereditament is taken to be ‘an amount equal to the rent at which it is estimated the hereditament might reasonably be expected to let from year to year’ on the basis of certain prescribed assumptions. Prescribed assumptions are set out in the 2000 Regulations which include the assumption that any plant or machinery, if it belongs to any class listed in the Schedule to the 2000 Regulations, is assumed to be part of the hereditament in or on which it is situated: ‘ other than any such plant or machinery which is in or on the hereditament and is used or intended to be used in connection with services mainly or exclusively as part of manufacturing operations or trade processes.” The plant ell within this exemption.

Lord Kerr, Lord Reed,Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes, Lady Black
[2018] UKSC 15, UKSC 2016/0226
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary video, SC 250118 am Jhearing, SC 290118pm Hearing
Valuation for Rating (Plant and Machinery) (England) Regulations 2000, Local Government Finance Act 1988 Sch 6
England and Wales
At UTLCBerry (VO) v Iceland Foods Ltd UTLC 14-Jan-2015
UTLC RATING – PLANT AND MACHINERY – air handling unit – whether rateable – whether used mainly or exclusively as part of manufacturing operations or trade processes – meaning of ‘trade processes’ – reg.2, . .
At CAIceland 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 . .
Much CriticisedKirby v Hunslet Union Assessment Committee HL 1906
The Act provided that the assessment of hereditaments was regulated on the principle that the rateable value was the rent which might be expected to be given for the hereditament alon
Held: The House disapproved a distinction based on whether . .
CitedTownley 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 . .
CitedTownley 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 . .
CitedUnion Cold Storage Co Ltd v Bancroft HL 1931
The House considered whether refrigeration equipment was for storage purposes or for the purposes of altering or adapting goods for sale.
Held: It was for storage purposes, although the refrigeration was described as being by means of an . .
CitedUnion Cold Storage Co Ltd v Southwark Assessment Committee QBD 1932
The rateability of certain cooling chambers in a warehouse used for storing food. 25% of what was undertaken there may have been freezing food and the remaining 75% storing food.
Held: Macnaughten J discussed the cold storage plant and . .
CitedPepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
CitedKilmarnock Equitable Co-operative Society Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners SCS 16-Feb-1966
Income Tax, Schedule D – Profits Tax – Capital allowances – Industrial building or structure – Building for screening and packing coal – Whether coal subjected to a process – Whether building used for purpose ancillary to a retail shop – Income Tax . .
CitedAssessor for Lothian Region v BP Oil Grangemouth Refinery Ltd 1985
Lands Valuation Appeal Court – a marine terminal at a petrochemical works, used solely for the purpose of loading refined oil, was premises ‘used in an industrial or trade process’ . .
CitedHays Business Services Ltd v Raley (Valuation Officer) 1986
A warehouse was used for the storage of archival materials including documents, films and audio-magnetic tapes. For some items of a sensitive nature, there had been installed specialist items of plant, including heating plant, humidifiers, and . .
CitedBestway (Holdings) Ltd v Luff (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 4-Mar-1998
The taxpayer company operated a wholesale cash and carry business from a number of self-service supermarkets. The stores sold groceries, household goods, tobacco, confectionery and various kinds of alcohol. Although the buildings were not open to . .
CitedLeda Properties Ltd, Re: Computer Centre LT 27-Mar-2009
LT RATING – hereditament – computer centre – whether entry to be deleted from list on ground that incapable of beneficial use – held that it should not be – whether open to appellant on basis of proposal for . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.605757