Site icon swarb.co.uk

Kingston Union v Metropolitan Water Board: HL 1926

The principle for valuation of properties for rating was to estimate ‘the rent at which the hereditaments might reasonably be expected to let from year to year’. But in applying that principle, so simple in appearance, to certain classes of hereditaments, great difficulties were encountered, and it was found necessary for rating experts and the courts to have recourse to hypotheses of a more or less violent character. The mains and other works might produce no rent at all, for no person would wish to become the tenant of them; but when seen as part of a great undertaking extending over a large and populous area, might be quite indispensable to the undertakers (who must be regarded as possible tenants) and so might command an extortionate rent. For a fair assessment a formula was required which . . would not compel the undertakers to pay rates on an aggregate sum exceeding the whole yearly value of their undertaking; and accordingly rating surveyors, soon after the passing of the Act of 1836, began to assess waterworks and other like concerns, such as railways, canals, gasworks, etc, upon the basis of the profits earned by the whole undertaking. The profits basis of valuation was a means of estimating the rent that the hypothetical tenant would pay.
Viscount Cave LC
[1926] AC 331
Parochial Assessments Act 1836 1
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Central Valuation Officer and another ex parte Edison First Power Limited HL 10-Apr-2003
Powergen sold a property to Edison. Powergen paid rates under a separate statutory rating regime, and paid an additional thirteen million pounds under an apportionment. Edison later complained that in being rated itself, the authorities had . .
CitedMilford Haven Conservancy Board v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1976
The Minister had power to make provision by order for determining rateable values ‘by such method as may be so specified’. The formula prescribed by the Minister for dock undertakings was based on 4% of their receipts, including receipts from some . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2021; Ref: scu.182919 br>

Exit mobile version