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 UT, the premises were undergoing reconstruction on the material day and that the UT was entitled to alter the rating list as it did to reflect that reality.
Judges:
Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge
Citations:
[2017] UKSC 14, [2017] 1 WLR 851, [2017] WLR(D) 178, [2017] RA 95, [2017] 2 All ER 971, UKSC 2015/0069
Links:
Bailii, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At UTLC – 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 . .
Cited – Poplar Assessment Committee v Roberts HL 1922
A public house was to be valued for rating under the 1869 Act. The question was whether the 1920 regulations, which limited the rent which could be charged, limited also the rating value.
Held: The statutory hypothesis used in setting a . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Dawkins (Valuation Officer) v Ash Brothers and Heaton HL 1969
The House considered the statutory principle of valuation for rating purposes: ‘But one excludes human realities to a limited and necessary extent, since it is only the human realities that give any value at all to hereditaments. They are excluded . .
Cited – Hounslow London Borough Council v Rent Audio Visual Ltd and Bryant (VO) 1970
. .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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. . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – De Silva and Another v Davis (VO) 1983
. .
Appeal from – Newbigin (Valuation Officer) v S J and J Monk (A Firm) CA 13-Feb-2015
. .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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, . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited by:
Cited – Telereal Trillium v Hewitt (Valuation Officer) SC 15-May-2019
The court considered correct approach to determination of the rateable value of an office building, in circumstances where the evidence showed at the relevant time a general demand in the area for comparable office buildings, but no actual tenant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Rating
Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.577937