Tuplin (Valuation Officer) v Focus (DIY) Ltd: UTLC 1 Jul 2009

UTLC RATING – proposal – validity – agreed alteration taking effect at beginning of financial year in which proposal made – further proposal made referring to VT decision – object to achieve earlier effective date for alteration – whether proposal valid – held that it was – Non-Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993 regs 4A, 5A, 7 and 13A.

[2009] UKUT 118 (LC)
Bailii
Non-Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993
England and Wales

Rating

Leading Case

Updated: 12 November 2021; Ref: scu.373420

Zhou v Osborne (Valuation Officer): LT 19 Aug 2008

LT RATING – composite hereditament – home working from ground floor front room – practice of Chinese medicine (acupuncture and herbalism) – window signage – advertisements – fitting out of room – whether medical practice commenced – appeal allowed – Local Government Finance Act 1988, s66(1)(a).

[2008] EWLands RA – 56 – 2007
Bailii
Local Government Finance Act 1988 66(1)(a)
England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.278622

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Mar 2014

latterdayECHR0314

The claimant said that it had been wrongfully deprived of relief from business rates for its two temples. It asserted that it was a religion, and that the treatment was discriminatory. The government said that the refusal was on the basis alone that the temples were not open to the public, and similar differentiations for example applied to the Church of England.
Held: Article 14 complements the other substantive provisions of the Convention and the Protocols. It has no independent existence since it has effect solely in relation to ‘the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms’ safeguarded by those provisions. The claim failed: ‘insofar as any difference of treatment between religious groups in comparable situations can be said to have been established in relation to tax exemption of places of worship, such difference of treatment had a reasonable and objective justification. In particular, the contested measure pursued a legitimate aim in the public interest and there was a reasonable relationship of proportionality between that aim and the means used to achieve it. The domestic authorities cannot be considered as having exceeded the margin of appreciation available to them in this context, even having due regard to the duties incumbent on the State by virtue of Article 9 of the Convention in relation to its exercise of its regulatory powers in the sphere of religious freedom. ‘

Ineta Ziemele, P
7552/09 – Chamber Judgment, [2014] ECHR 227
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 9 14
Citing:
CitedEweida And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jan-2013
Eweida_ukECHR2013
The named claimant had been employed by British Airways. She was a committed Christian and wished to wear a small crucifix on a chain around her neck. This breached the then dress code and she was dismissed. Her appeals had failed. Other claimants . .
CitedGallagher (Valuation Officer) v Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints HL 30-Jul-2008
The House considered whether certain properties of the Church were subject to non-domestic rating. Various buildings were on the land, and the officer denied that some fell within the exemptions, and in particular whether the Temple itself was a . .
CitedChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v Henning (Valuation Officer) HL 1964
The House was asked whether the Mormon Temple at Godstone was exempt from rates as a ‘place of public religious worship’.
Held: The words could not apply to places used for religious worship from which the public was excluded.
Lord Pearce . .
CitedNational Union of Belgian Police v Belgium ECHR 27-Oct-1975
Hudoc No violation of Art. 11; No violation of Art. 14+11
The Belgian Government failed to consult a municipal police union about legislation affecting public sector employment rights. The union’s direct . .
CitedThlimmenos v Greece ECHR 6-Apr-2000
(Grand Chamber) The application of a rule that a felon could not become a chartered accountant infringed the rights under article 14, taken in conjunction with article 9, of a pacifist convicted of the felony of refusing to perform military service. . .
CitedSchmidt And Dahlstrom v Sweden ECHR 6-Feb-1976
ECHR No violation of Art. 11; No violation of Art. 14+11 . .
CitedHasan and Chaush v Bulgaria ECHR 26-Oct-2000
The Grand Chamber considered executive interference in the appointment of the Chief Mufti of the Bulgarian Muslims: ‘Where the organisation of the religious community is at issue, Article 9 must be interpreted in the light of Article 11 of the . .
CitedMetropolitan Church Of Bessarabia And Others v Moldova ECHR 13-Dec-2001
‘in principle, the right to freedom of religion as understood in the Convention rules out any appreciation by the state of the legitimacy of religious beliefs or of the manner in which these are expressed’ . .
CitedDH v Czech Republic ECHR 13-Nov-2007
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that their children had been moved to special schools which did not reflect their needs from ordinary schools without them being consulted.
Held: The Court noted that, at the relevant time, the . .
CitedReligionsgemeinschaft der Zeugen Jehovas And Others v Austria ECHR 31-Jul-2008
The State has a duty to remain neutral and impartial in exercising its regulatory power in the sphere of religious freedom and in its relations with different religions, denominations and beliefs. . .
CitedBurden and Burden v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Dec-2006
Sisters,Together always not Discriminated Against
(Grand Chamber) The claimants were sisters who had lived together all their lives and owned property jointly. They complained that the Inheritance Tax regime treated them worse than it would a married couple, and was discriminatory.
Held: . .
CitedRunkee And White v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-May-2007
The claimant said that the rules which denied him a widow’s pension were sex discrimination.
Held: The normally strict test for justification of sex discrimination in the enjoyment of the Convention rights gives way to the ‘manifestly without . .
CitedSavez Crkava (Rijec Zivota) And Others v Croatia ECHR 9-Dec-2010
. .
CitedCarson and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 4-Nov-2008
(Grand Chamber) Pensioners who had moved abroad complained that they had been excluded from the index-linked uprating of pensions given to pensioners living in England.
Held: This was not an infringement of their human rights. Differences in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Ecclesiastical, Rating

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.521979

John Laing and Son Ltd v Kingswood Assessment Committee: KBD 1949

The appellant building contractors had been engaged by the Air Ministry to execute works at an aerodrome. They erected on the site, for the purpose of carrying out the contract, offices, garages, canteen for workmen and other structures. Although the site was handed over to the contractors, the conditions of the contract between the contractors and the Air Ministry specified that the execution of the work was subject to the control and direction of the Ministry’s Superintending Officer. In due course the local rating authority proposed to amend its valuation list by adding the contractors’ officers and other structures as a rateable hereditament. A special case was stated for the opinion of the Divisional Court on the question whether the contractors were in rateable occupation of that hereditament.
Held: The contractor’s appeal failed. The four conditions of rateable occupation are (i) actual occupational possession (which involves actual as opposed to intended user of the land in question); (ii) occupation or possession which is exclusive (ie if the occupier can exclude all other persons from using the land in the same way as he does); (iii) occupation or possession which is of some value or benefit to the occupier/possessor; (iv) occupation or possession which has a sufficient quality of permanence.
Tucker LJ said: ‘Mr Rowe has said that there are four necessary ingredients in rateable occupation, and I do not think there is any controversy with regard to those ingredients. First, there must be actual occupation; secondly, that it must be exclusive for the particular purposes of the possessor; thirdly, that the possession must be of some value or benefit to the possessor; and, fourthly, the possession must not be for too transient a period.’
Jenkins J, dealing with the fourth requirement, considered that it had been met by the fact that the builders’ huts had been on the land for the two years that work was being carried out there.

Tucker LJ, Jenkins J
[1949] 1 KB 344
England and Wales
Cited by:
ApprovedLondon 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.
CitedTallington Lakes Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Grantham Magistrates Court Admn 25-Nov-2010
The company appealed against liability orders made against it for non-payment of domestic rates, saying that in each case it had not been the rateable occupier. The property had been subdivided and let to companies of which the appellant was a . .
CitedJDE Plant Hire Limited v Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council QBD 2000
The company appealed against liability orders made against it. It owned premises which were subdivided and let to other businesses which it contended were the ones in actual occupation, since it did not benefit from physical, non-transient . .
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 . .
ApprovedCinderella 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 CA 17-Apr-2013
The taxpayer had successfully challenged the entry of his houseboat in the rating list at the Valuation Tribunal, but this had been re-instated at first instance. He said that the boat, as a registered seagoing vessel was not a houseboat, and that . .
CitedSunderland City Council v Stirling Investment Properties Llp Admn 24-May-2013
The Council appealed by cases stated against dismissal of its summons against the defendant alleging non-payment of non-domestic rates. The property owned by the respondent had been occupied by a tenant, but only by a small equipment box, and the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.181050

Hilleshog Sugar Beet Breeding Co Ltd v Wilke: LT 1971

hilleshopLT1971

Parcels of land were occupied for 9-10 months in a year.
Held: This was not too transient a period to establish a rateable occupation notwithstanding that in subsequent years the occupation passed on to the other land.
Sir Michael Rowe QC, P said: ‘The ratepayers’ possession of the plots they hold in any one year is not intermittent nor is it casual; it is a continuous possession for nine months or so, which cover the whole, at least in most years, of the period during which the land can be cultivated and planted up and the crop grown to maturity and harvested’.

Sir Michael Rowe QC P
[1971] RA 275
Cited by:
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 . .
CitedReeves (Listing Officer) v Northrop CA 17-Apr-2013
The taxpayer had successfully challenged the entry of his houseboat in the rating list at the Valuation Tribunal, but this had been re-instated at first instance. He said that the boat, as a registered seagoing vessel was not a houseboat, and that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.451836

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
Citing:
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.

Rating

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.605757

Hewitt (VO) v Telereal Trillium: UTLC 16 Jun 2016

Entry of nil valuation on list

UTLC RATING – Valuation – non- domestic hereditament – Local Government Finance Act 1988 schedule 6 – appeal to Upper Tribunal raising a point of law upon agreed facts – agreement that had the subject office hereditament been on the market at the relevant date nobody in the real world would have been prepared to occupy the property and pay a positive price – other comparable office properties in occupation at substantial rents at relevant date – whether a nil (or nominal) rateable value to be entered in valuation list . . appeal allowed.

[2016] UKUT 258 (LC)
Bailii
Local Government Finance Act 1988
England and Wales
Cited by:
At UTLCTelereal Trillium v Hewitt (Valuation Officer) CA 19-Jan-2018
The land owner appealed from a finding that the offices which it could not let for lack of commercial demand had a rating list valuation of pounds 370,000.
Held: The valuation was set aside and replaced with a value reflecting the market value . .
At UTLCTelereal 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: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.565806

Westminster City Council v Southern Railway Co: HL 1936

Subject to special enactments, people are treated as occupiers of land, land being understood as including not only the surface of the earth but all strata above or below. The occupier, not the land, is rateable; but the occupier is rateable in respect of the land which he occupies. Whether the person sought to be rated has the enjoyment of the land ‘to the substantial exclusion of all other persons’ is a question of in fact is the occupation in respect of which the person is said to be rateable and, in that respect, it is immaterial whether the title to occupy is attributable to a lease or a licence.
Lord Russell of Killowen said: ‘In the next place I would make a few general observations upon rateable occupation. Subject to special enactments, people are rated as occupiers of land, the land being understood as including not only the surface of the earth but all strata above or below. The occupier, not the land, is rateable; but, the occupier is rateable in respect of the land which he occupies. Occupation, however, is not synonymous with legal possession: the owner of an empty house has the legal possession, but he is not in rateable occupation. Rateable occupation, however, must include actual possession, and it must have some degree of permanence: a mere temporary holding of land will not constitute rateable occupation.’
. . And ‘Where there is no rival claimant to the occupancy, no difficulty can arise; but in certain cases there may be rival occupancy in some person who, to some extent, may have occupancy rights over the premises. The question in every such case must be one of fact – namely, whose position in relation to occupation is paramount, and whose permission in relation to occupancy is subordinate; but, in my opinion, the question must be considered and answered in regard to the position and rights of the parties in respect of the premises in question, and in regard to the purpose of the occupation of those premises.’

Lord Russell of Killowen
[1936] AC 511
England and Wales
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. . .
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 . .
CitedTallington Lakes Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Grantham Magistrates Court Admn 25-Nov-2010
The company appealed against liability orders made against it for non-payment of domestic rates, saying that in each case it had not been the rateable occupier. The property had been subdivided and let to companies of which the appellant was a . .
CitedReeves (Listing Officer) v Northrop CA 17-Apr-2013
The taxpayer had successfully challenged the entry of his houseboat in the rating list at the Valuation Tribunal, but this had been re-instated at first instance. He said that the boat, as a registered seagoing vessel was not a houseboat, and that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.181048

Porter (Valuation Officer) v Trustees of Gladman Sipps: UTLC 20 May 2011

UTLC RATING – hereditament – newly erected office buildings – entered in rating list by VO – units lacking small power points and partitioning – whether rateable hereditaments to be entered in the list – held they were not – appeal dismissed – Local Government Finance Act 1988 s 42(1).

N J Rose P
[2011] UKUT 204 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.440792

Arsenal Football Club Ltd v Ende, Smith: HL 1978

It was said that the Arsenal football stadium was under-valued in local rating list. The House was asked who might be a ‘person aggrieved’ and entitled to complain about the under-valuation of a hereditament in the same area.
Held: A person liable to pay rates in the same area was entitled to challenge the valuation of another hereditament even if he could not show any financial or other loss to himself.
Lord Wilberforce said that ‘Uniformity and fairness have always been proclaimed and judicially approved as standards by which to judge the validity of rates.’
Viscount Dilhorne said: ‘While it is true that words in the English language take colour from the context in which they are used, I see nothing in the subsection or in the remainder of the 1967 Act to warrant giving to the word ‘aggrieved’ any meaning other than its ordinary natural meaning. To be ‘aggrieved’ a person must be affected by the matter of which he complains.’

Lord Wilberforce, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton
[1979] AC 1
General Rate Act 1967 69(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedWalton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.470546

North Somerset District Council v Honda Motor Europe Ltd and Others: QBD 2 Jul 2010

Deleayed Rates Claims Service made them Defective

The council claimed that the defendants were liable for business rates. The defendants said that the notices were defective in not having been served ‘as soon as practicable’, and further that they should not be enforced since the delay had created substantial prejudice. The Council challenged the correctness of the Waltham Forest and Nottingham cases.
Held: The court reviewed the issue of delay in issuing claims for rates. Though Honda had been in rateable occupation, the claims had ot been served as soon as was practicable, and, given the Council’s delays which would lead to an unconscionable burden on Honda, the case for recovering the sums claimed was unsustainable. The claim against all the defendants failed.

Burnett J
[2010] EWHC 1505 (QB), [2010] RA 285
Bailii
Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989/1058), Local Government Finance Act 1988
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedEncon Insulation Ltd v Nottingham City Council Admn 9-Jun-1999
When the rating authority discovered ratable premises, and issued claims going back in time the test was not whether they were unaware of them earlier, but whether they could have taken steps beforehand to discover the existence of the premises. A . .
CitedLondon Borough of Waltham Forest, Regina (On the Application of) v Waltham Forest Magistrates’ Court and Yem Yom Ventures Limited Admn 4-Nov-2008
. .
CitedRegina v Soneji and Bullen HL 21-Jul-2005
The defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not . .
CitedJJB Sports Plc, Regina (On the Application of) v Telford and Wrekin Borough Council Admn 5-Nov-2008
The authority’s demand notice was served later than was practicable. The company now appealed against a liability order.
Held: The ratepayer’s appeal by way of Case Stated was dismissed. ‘demand notices must be served by the relevant authority . .
CitedRegentford Ltd v Thanet District Council Admn 18-Feb-2004
The council sought to enforce payment of arrears of council tax. The company responded that proceedings had not been begun in time. The company contended that time ran from the day when the council set the precept. The regulations said that time ran . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Jeyeanthan; Ravichandran v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 21-May-1999
The applicant had failed to comply with the Rules in not using the form prescribed for appliying for leave to appeal against a special adjudicator’s decision to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. The application, by letter, included all the relevant . .
CitedHardy v Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council Admn 27-Jul-2006
Appeal against finding of liability to pay council tax.
Held: A Magistrates’ Court which is invited to make a liability order may be entitled to refuse to make such an order in a case where there has been a serious breach of the mandatory . .
CitedHoward v Bodington Carc 27-Feb-1877
Imperative or Directory Statutory Requirements
The court considered the consequences of a failure to comply with a statutory requirement.
Held: The distinction drawn between statutory requirements which were ‘imperative’ on the one hand and ‘directory’ on the other involved unfortunate use . .
CitedLondon and Clydeside Estates v Aberdeen District Council HL 8-Nov-1979
Identifying ‘maandatory’ and ‘regulatory’
The appellants had sought a Certificate of Alternative Development. The certificate provided was defective in that it did not notify the appellants, as required, of their right to appeal. Their appeal out of time was refused.
Held: The House . .
CitedAttorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999: Application By the British Broadcasting Corporation To Set Aside or Vary a Reporting Restriction Order HL 17-Jun-2009
An application was made to discharge an anonymity order made in previous criminal proceedings before the House. The defendant was to be retried for rape under the 2003 Act, after an earlier acquittal. The applicant questioned whether such a order . .
CitedRegentford Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Shepway District Council Admn 25-Oct-2006
A breach of the statutory duty by the billing authority to serve the notice as soon as practicable does not operate in all cases as a windfall to the person otherwise liable, but the breach precludes a claim to payment and a duty to pay only where . .
CitedWandsworth London Borough Council v Winder HL 1985
Rent demands were made by a local authority landlord on one of its tenants. The local authority, using its powers under the Act, resolved to increase rents generally. The tenant refused to pay the increased element of the rent. He argued that the . .
CitedCharles v The Judicial and Legal Service Commission and The Disciplinary Tribunal PC 19-Jun-2002
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) Disciplinary proceedings had commenced against the appellant, the chief magistrate, but the time limits had not been followed. The appellant argued that the time limits were mandatory. . .
CitedProject Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority 28-Apr-1998
(High Court of Australia) ‘In our opinion, the Court of Appeal of New South Wales was correct in Tasker v Fullwood in criticising the continued use of the ‘elusive distinction between directory and mandatory requirements’ and the division of . .
CitedWang v Commissioner of Inland Revenue PC 19-Oct-1994
(Hong Kong) At first instance the judge found that the deputy commissioner lacked jurisdiction to make two determinations since he had not done so within a reasonable time required by the imperative language of the statute. The Court of Appeal . .
CitedBoddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
CitedDedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances CA 1973
The claimant sought to bring his claim under a provision which required a complaint to the industrial tribunal to be made within four weeks of the dismissal unless the employment tribunal was satisfied that this was not ‘practicable’. He did not . .
CitedRegina v Chief Constable of South Wales and Another Ex Parte Merrick QBD 17-Feb-1994
The court considered the failure of the respondent to comply with a statutory requirement to comply with a request from a detained person to consult a solicitor ‘as soon as practicable’.
Held: For the police to deny access to solicitors at . .
CitedAllan v Liverpool Overseers 1874
The court was asked whether a steamship company was liable to be rated in respect of its occupation of sheds which it occupied under a licence from the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board. The court noted that liability for rates fell only on a person . .
CitedHewson, Chapman and Co ltd v Grimsby County Borough Council 1953
That storage facilities might stand empty from time to time does not result in their ceasing to be in rateable occupation during those periods. . .
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 . .
CitedCamden London Borough Council v Herwald 1978
Occupation of part of a hereditament by someone who retains legal possession of the whole and whose occupation of the part fulfils the description in the rating list, amounts to rateable occupation of the whole. . .
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 . .
CitedP.B. Groenveld BV v Produktschap voor Vee en Vlees ECJ 8-Nov-1979
A prohibited restriction on exports involved a national measure having discriminatory effect: ‘provision [i.e. Article 29 EC; now Article 35 TFEU] concerns the national measures which have as their specific object or effect the restriction of . .
CitedEdison First Power Ltd v The Secretary of State for Department of Environment Transport and the Regions CA 12-Jul-2001
. .

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

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.420209

United Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of England v Holborn Borough Council: 1957

The Freemasons sought to be entitled to rating relief as having the purpose of advancing religion. To belong to the Freemasons a person did not need to practise any religion providing he believed in a Supreme Being and lived a moral life. This was viewed as laudable but not the same as advancing religion. It was noted that it might be argued that religion can be advanced by ‘example as well as precept’ but there was no evidence before the Court that the main object of Masons was to go out in the world and, by their example, lead persons to one religion or another. There was ‘no religious instruction, no programme for the persuasion of unbelievers, no religious supervision to see that its members remain active and constant in the various religions they profess, no holding of religious services, no pastoral or missionary work of any kind.’
Held: The Court defined ‘advancing’ religion as meaning ‘to promote it, to spread its message ever wider among mankind; to take some positive steps to sustain and increase religious belief.’ This was said to be able to be done ‘in a variety of ways which may be comprehensively described as pastoral and missionary.’

[1957] 1 WLR 1080, [1957] 3 All ER 281
England and Wales

Rating

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.570864

Powys County Council v Hurst: Admn 4 Jul 2018

Pension not attachable for Council Tax arrears

Recovery of unpaid council tax – whether pension was ‘earnings’ for attachment of earnings order.
Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The pension was not available to be attached, and it had exhausted all alternatives to committal.

Hickinbottom, Singh LJJ
[2018] EWHC 1684 (Admin), [2018] WLR(D) 413
Bailii, WLRD
Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992
England and Wales

Rating, Magistrates

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.619004

Reeves (VO) v Tobias and Others: UTLC 22 Nov 2010

RATING – hereditament – whether car parking spaces in a car park licensed to residential occupiers and used by them in connection with nearby residential premises were domestic property and so exempt from rating – held they were not – appeal allowed – Local Government Finance Act 1988, s 66(1)

[2010] UKUT 411 (LC), [2011] 16 EG 80, [2011] RA 149
Bailii
England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.569613

Ash (Valuation Officer): LT 29 Sep 2008

LT RATING – valuation – 2005 list – outdoor market authorised by Royal Charter and operated by local authority – whether shortened profits method of valuation appropriate – held that it was -appeal allowed – RV increased from andpound;6,100 to andpound;14,300.

[2008] EWLands RA – 64 – 2007
Bailii
England and Wales

Rating

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.278623

Royal 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 charitable for the exemption to apply. The one at issue was the object ‘to promote the advance of nursing as a profession in all or any of its branches’,

Morris, Romer, Willmer LJJ
[1959] EWCA Civ 1, [1959] 3 All ER 663, [1959] 1 WLR 1077
Bailii
Rating and Valuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955 8
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedOverseers of the Savoy v Art Union of London Limited QBD 1894
AL Smith LJ considered the objects of the company: ‘If the other object be only a means to the one end . . then the Society has a sole and exclusive object and not another object subsidiary thereto’. . .
CitedGeneral 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Charity

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.262822

Regina v East Sussex Valuation Tribunal Ex Parte Silverstone: QBD 10 May 1996

There were two flats, which the applicant bought with a view to carrying out extensive repairs and converting into one unit. This went only slowly, the work being done by the applicant himself. The applicant had in fact been living in the property, although he said it was vacant for about three months after he bought it. The property concerned was included in the initial valuation list as two separate dwellings, both of which were placed in band C, but in July 1993 the applicant made a proposal to alter the list on the basis that the dwellings should have been included in the valuation list as one entry. The applicant submitted that the dwelling did not, at the relevant date, comply with the statutory assumptions which are set out in Regulation 6.
Held: Conversion of two houses to one requires a new valuation, not an amalgamation. Nevertheless, the simple question before the court was one of law, namely whether the assumptions in that legislation are rebuttable. Carnwath J concluded that they were not rebuttable. He said that an assumption is by definition a hypothesis which may be adopted whether or not it is in fact true.
Carnwath J
Times 10-May-1996, [1996] RVR 203
Council Tax (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedWilson v Josephine Coll (Listing Officer) Admn 13-Oct-2011
The land owners challenged the re-appearance of their empty and disrepaired dweliinghouse in the valuation list. It had been exempt for twelve months. The appellanat said that the appeal property was not a hereditament as it was not in reasonable . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.86620

Edison First Power Ltd v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions: CA 12 Jul 2001

[2001] EWCA Civ 1096
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina (ex parte Edison First Power Limited v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport, Same v Central Valuation Officer Admn 31-Mar-2000
. .

Cited by:
See AlsoEdison First Power Ltd v The Secretary of State for Department of Environment Transport and the Regions CA 12-Jul-2001
. .
At CARegina 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.218302

Union 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 refrigerating plant in the building saying that it was ‘admittedly plant on the hereditament for the purpose of manufacturing operations or trade processes’
(1932) 16 R and IT 160
England and Wales
Cited by:
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 May 2021; Ref: scu.605774

Smith (a bankrupt) v Braintree District Council: HL 1989

The House considered the effects of bankruptcy on the imposition of a committal to imprisonment in default of paying rates.
The purpose of section 285 is to preserve the estate of the bankrupt for the benefit of his unsecured creditors.
Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle said that, in view of the changes in policy shown by the new Act, he felt justified in construing the provision of the Act of 1986 ‘as a piece of new legislation without regard to 19th century authorities or similar provisions of repealed Bankruptcy Acts.’
Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle
[1989] 3 All ER 897, [1989] 3 WLR 1317, [1990] 2 AC 215
Bankruptcy Act 1986
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBristol Airport Plc and Another v Powdrill and Others CA 21-Dec-1989
An airline company went into administration. The airport seized two airplanes. The administrators claimed they were property within the administration, could not be seized without a court order, and the court should exercise its discretion not to . .
CitedHarlow District Council v Hall CA 28-Feb-2006
The defendant had been subject to a possession order in respect of his secure tenancy. He was later adjudged bankrupt. He asserted that the bankruptcy specifically prevented other action to enforce the debt, and the suspended possession order was . .
CitedPoulton v Ministry of Justice CA 22-Apr-2010
The claimant was trustee in bankruptcy but the court failed to register the bankruptcy petition at the Land Registry as a pending action. The bankrupt was therefore able to sell her land, and the trustee did not recover the proceeds. The trustee . .
CitedIn re Mordant CA 1996
The court discussed the interplay of family and insolvency proceedings: ‘Since the wife is unable to prove in the husband’s bankruptcy, the position . . is that the husband’s trustee must use the andpound;385,000 in paying the trustee’s expenses . .
CitedMcRoberts v McRoberts ChD 1-Nov-2012
The parties had agreed to an ancillary relief order on their divorce. The husband was made bankrupt without having paid the lump sum agreed. The former wife and now claimant had received no dividend. Debts which were not provable in the bankruptcy . .
CitedSingh v HM Revenue and Customs UTTC 15-May-2010
UTTC JUDICIAL REVIEW – the concession of ‘equitable liability’ known as the Noble practice – standing to bring judicial review proceedings – no.
The bankrupt objected to the attempted proof by the Revenue in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 May 2021; Ref: scu.181067

Mouland, Re Gatwick Airport: UTLC 6 Feb 2012

UTLC RATING – valuation – airport business centre – lease containing restrictions on use to meet requirements of airport operator landlord – whether use as business centre in same category or mode of use as office use – held it was not – rent payable better evidence of value than tone of value for offices – appeal dismissed – RV confirmed at andpound;170,000
N J Rose FRICS
[2012] UKUT 32 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 March 2021; Ref: scu.452857

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.’
Mr Justice Burnton
[2004] EWHC 1800 (Admin)
Bailii
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.200305

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
[2009] UKUT 187 (LC), [2009] RA 289
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.415023

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’.
Lord Bonomy
[2009] ScotCS CSOH – 139, [2010] RA 227
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 February 2021; Ref: scu.377245

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.’
Treacy LJ, King J
[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
Bailii, WLRD
Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement)(Local Lists) Regulations 1989, Local Government Finance Act 1988 43(6), Rating (Empty Properties) Act 2007
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 February 2021; Ref: scu.470484

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).
[2009] EWLands RA – 59 – 2007
Bailii
Local Government Finance Act 1988
England and Wales

Updated: 14 February 2021; Ref: scu.341635

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
[2008] EWLands RA – 57 – 2007
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 11 February 2021; Ref: scu.278639

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.’
Lord Hewart CJ, Hawke, Lawrence JJ
[1936] 1 KB 585
Rating and Valuation Act 1925 24
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 February 2021; Ref: scu.605770

Newbigin (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 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.
Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge
[2017] UKSC 14, [2017] 1 WLR 851, [2017] WLR(D) 178, [2017] RA 95, [2017] 2 All ER 971, UKSC 2015/0069
Bailii, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video
England and Wales
Citing:
At UTLCS 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 . .
CitedPoplar 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 . .
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 . .
CitedArbuckle 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 . .
CitedWexler 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 . .
CitedDawkins (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 . .
CitedHounslow London Borough Council v Rent Audio Visual Ltd and Bryant (VO) 1970
. .
CitedEasiwork 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 . .
CitedRavenseft 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 . .
CitedSaunders 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. . .
CitedCamden 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 . .
CitedDe Silva and Another v Davis (VO) 1983
. .
Appeal fromNewbigin (Valuation Officer) v S J and J Monk (A Firm) CA 13-Feb-2015
. .
CitedPaynter (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 . .
CitedBenjamin 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, . .
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 February 2021; Ref: scu.577937

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.
[1960] AC 813
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 February 2021; Ref: scu.533872

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.
Collins J
[2008] EWHC 2212 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 10 February 2021; Ref: scu.276534

Valuation Officer v Citibank Na: LT 7 Feb 2007

LT RATING – hereditament – alteration of rating list – office building extended floor by floor into new adjoining building – series of alterations to list to reflect each extension – whether each extension had effect of creating new hereditament – whether alterations valid – effective date of alterations – appeals allowed – Non-Domestic Rating (Material Day for List Alterations) Regulations 1992 reg 3 – Non-Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists an Appeals) Regulations 1993 reg 13A
[2007] EWLands RA – 66 – 2004
Bailii

Updated: 02 February 2021; Ref: scu.249410

Lane v Woolway: LT 9 Aug 2006

LT RATING – valuation – 2000 rating list – private members club – scaffolding to neighbouring building works severely impeding access – previous assessment omitting value of part of hereditament – whether assessment to be deleted … deduction appropriate to reflect disability relevance of previous underassessment (assessment reduced temporarily to RV andpound;5,500.
Rose FRICS
[2006] EWLands RA – 57 – 2005
Bailii

Updated: 31 January 2021; Ref: scu.245452

Humphreys-Jones (T/A Cathedral Frames) v Welsby (VO): LT 21 Mar 2001

LT RATING – annual value – lock-up shop – valuation – rents and assessments of comparable premises – mode or category of occupation – rebus sic stantibus – ratepayers appeal allowed in part – assessment reduced from andpound;2,550 RV to andpound;2,430 RV
[2001] EWLands RA – 29 – 2000
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 23 January 2021; Ref: scu.225640

Telereal Trillium v Hewitt (Valuation Officer): CA 19 Jan 2018

The land owner appealed from a finding that the offices which it could not let for lack of commercial demand had a rating list valuation of pounds 370,000.
Held: The valuation was set aside and replaced with a value reflecting the market value of pounds 1.00.
Sir Ernest Ryder SPT, Davis, Henderson LJJ
[2018] EWCA Civ 26, [2018] 1 WLR 3463, [2018] WLR(D) 32
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
At UTLCHewitt (VO) v Telereal Trillium UTLC 16-Jun-2016
Entry of nil valuation on list
UTLC RATING – Valuation – non- domestic hereditament – Local Government Finance Act 1988 schedule 6 – appeal to Upper Tribunal raising a point of law upon agreed facts – agreement that had the subject office . .

Cited by:
At CATelereal 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 January 2021; Ref: scu.602964

National Car Parks Ltd v Baird (Valuation Officer) and Another: CA 22 Jul 2004

The claimant appealed against valuations by the defendants. They complained that the statute imposed a duty on them to alter the rating lists to accpord with agreements as to their value.
Held: The statute imposed no time scale for the defendants to implement the changes. What time was proper therefore required the court to look at all the circumstances. Indeed in this case the claimants could establish any right to have the lists changed at all.
Lord Justice Clarke Vice-Chancellor, The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson
[2004] EWCA Civ 967, Times 09-Sep-2004
Bailii
Local Government Finance Act 1988
England and Wales

Updated: 13 January 2021; Ref: scu.199487

Orange 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 could ask what would be the cost of the company taking a lease of the land. The valuation was correct.
Lord Justice Auld Lord Justice Jacob Lord Justice Thomas
[2004] EWCA Civ 155, Times 20-Feb-2004, Gazette 26-Feb-2004
Bailii
Telecommunications Act 1984, Local Government Finance Act 1988 Sch6
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedHoare and Another v National Trust Hoare and Another v National Trust CA 13-Oct-1998
The rating hypothesis must be interpreted to allow for the actual policies of the tenant. Where the tenant would not overbid despite the finding that properties of this type could not be managed to produce a profit. Nil rating was appropriate. Peter . .
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 . .
CitedPoplar 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 . .
CitedDawkins (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 . .
CitedRobinson Brothers (Brewers) Ltd v Houghton and Chester-Le-Street Assessment Committee CA 1937
The enquiry which set the value of land for rating was economic not legal in nature. The passing rent, if determined by the operation of the market, would carry significant weight in that process.
Scott LJ said: Where the particular . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 January 2021; Ref: scu.193582

Rodney District Council and others v Attorney General: PC 7 Oct 2002

(New Zealand) The appeal concerned the rating of properties. Where two properties were held under the same land certificates, was this enough to have require only one listing on the valuation roll. New Zealand uses the Torrens style of Land Registration, under which, it was argued, the unit of registration determined also entries for ‘separate properties’. This has its origin in Scots law. The authorities contended that the test was rather the unit of occupation.
Held: The expression ‘separate property’ was not defined. It was to be interpreted within the context in which it was used. In this case that meant rating, not land law, and it was dangerous to bring forward meanings for wordings from earlier statutes. Separate occupation was the correct criterion.
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
[2002]UKPC 47, [2003] RA 180
Bailii, PC
Rating Valuations Act 1998
England and Wales

Updated: 09 January 2021; Ref: scu.177998

The Taff Vale Railway Company v The Local Board Of Health For The District Of Cardiff: 18 Nov 1857

The maintenance of the highways within the district of a local board of health must be provided for by a district rate, and not by a highway rate, whether the district be or be not conterminous with an ancient parochial division.
[1857] EngR 898, (1857) 8 El and Bl 535, (1857) 120 ER 200
Commonlii
England and Wales

Updated: 07 January 2021; Ref: scu.290644

Regina (ex parte Edison First Power Limited v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport, Same v Central Valuation Officer: Admn 31 Mar 2000

Carnwath J
[2000] EWHC Admin 317, [2000] RA 1
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromEdison First Power Ltd v The Secretary of State for Department of Environment Transport and the Regions CA 12-Jul-2001
. .
At First InstanceRegina 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 . .
Appeal fromEdison First Power Ltd v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions CA 12-Jul-2001
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 December 2020; Ref: scu.140131

Home Office v Jackson (Valuation Officer): UTLC 19 Jul 2018

RATING – valuation – 2010 compiled list entry of large high-quality modern office building – building constructed in three blocks with bridge connections on certain floors – main space rate – comparables of similar quality but different location – whether adjustment required to comparables for location – method of adjustment – allowance claimed for quantum – allowance also claimed for fragmentation to reflect alleged disadvantages of the layout in three blocks – appeal allowed in part – rateable value determined at pounds 22,700,000
[2018] UKUT 171 (LC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 19 December 2020; Ref: scu.620101

Kirby 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 the plant was a fixture, in the traditional land law sense. A factory’s assessment to poor rate must be based on the standing equipment of machinery in the factory, irrespective of whether or not it was affixed to the freehold so as to form part of it.
Held: The House disapproved a distinction based on whether the plant was a fixture, in the traditional land law sense. A factory’s assessment to poor rate must be based on the standing equipment of machinery in the factory, irrespective of whether or not it was affixed to the freehold so as to form part of it.
Lord Halsbury said that he would: ‘decline myself to enter into what I may call the original equities which might have guided this matter. It is, enough for me that a long series of decisions, for certainly half a century, have established the bald proposition, which is all I am insisting upon, namely’. that although the machinery may not be part of the freehold, it yet is to be taken into account, and in saying that, I do not want to muffle it in a phrase, but what I mean by that is, that to increase the amount of the rate which is exacted from the tenant you may enter into that question and form a judgment upon it, although, as a matter of fact, the machinery may hot be attached to the freehold.’
Lord Macnaghten,Lord Halsbury
[1906] AC 43
Parochial Assessment Act 1836
England and Wales
Cited by:
Much CriticisedIceland 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.
[2018] UKSC 15, UKSC 2016/0226
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 . .
[2016] EWCA Civ 1150, [2016] WLR(D) 620, [2017] Bus LR 766, [2017] Bus LR 1098

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.605769

Makro Properties Limited v Nuneaton and Bedworth BC: Admn 2012

A minor use will constitute rateable occupation for the purposes of liability to occupied rates.
[2012] EWHC 2250 (Admin)
Local Government Finance Act 1988 43(6)
Citing:
CitedGage v Wren 1903
. .
[1903] 67 JP 32

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

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.567242

Gage v Wren: 1903

[1903] 67 JP 32
Cited by:
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. . .
[2012] EWHC 2250 (Admin)
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 . .
[2013] EWHC 54 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 23, [2013] 3 WLR 422, [2013] 2 EGLR 138, [2014] 1 QB 62, [2013] RA 75

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.567243

Wynn v Skegness UDC: 1967

[1967] 1 WLR 52
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 . .
[2013] EWHC 54 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 23, [2013] 3 WLR 422, [2013] 2 EGLR 138, [2014] 1 QB 62, [2013] RA 75

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.567241

National Deposit Friendly Society Trustees v Skegness Urban District Council: HL 1959

The House considered the meaning of the phrase ‘the advancement of . . social welfare’ in the 1955 Act. Lord Denning said: ‘A person is commonly said to be engaged in ‘social welfare’ when he is engaged in doing good for others who are in need – in the sense that he does it, not for personal or private reasons – not because they are relatives or friends of his – but because they are members of the Community or of a portion of it who need help . . If a person is engaged in improving the conditions of life of others who are so placed as to be in need, he is engaged in ‘social welfare”.
Lord Denning
[1959] AC 293
Rating and Valuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedGuild v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 6-May-1992
The will left land for a sports centre to a local authority which no longer existed. If the gift was charitable, the gift would be applied cy pres, but if not it would fail and pass to the family and be subect to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A gift . .
Gazette 06-May-92, [1990] UKHL 10, [1992] 2 AC 310, [1992] UKHL 16, [1993] Imm AR 112, [1992] 1 WLR 1052, [1992] 4 All ER 673

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.273193

Assessor 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’
Lord Ross
(1985) SLT 453
Scotland
Cited by:
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.
[2018] UKSC 15, UKSC 2016/0226

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.605776

Union 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 ‘elaborate process’ and it was accepted that a freezing process might alter the goods.
Viscount Dunedin
[1931] AC 446
England and Wales
Cited by:
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.
[2018] UKSC 15, UKSC 2016/0226
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 . .
[2016] EWCA Civ 1150, [2016] WLR(D) 620, [2017] Bus LR 766, [2017] Bus LR 1098

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.605775

Hays 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 fire-protection equipment which utilised Halon gas so as to extinguish fires without damaging the stored items. The Solicitor for the Inland Revenue, for the Valuation Officer, had conceded that the specialist heating and humidification equipment were non-rateable.
Held: The tribunal agreed in respect of the fire protection plant, which was not rateable because it was ‘on the hereditament primarily to protect the material that is stored there’. It added: ‘Even if it were to be found that this could only be done by the protection of the building and therefore that that was the main use of the equipment, it would nevertheless not be included within the schedule because it was there expressly for the purpose of the trade process being carried on.’
Emlyn Jones FRICS
[1986] 1 EGLR 226 (LT)
England and Wales
Cited by:
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.
[2018] UKSC 15, UKSC 2016/0226

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.605777

Newcome v Mathew: 3 May 1832

A new mill erectad on the site of an ancient mill is exempt from tithes : but if it is built partly on the site of the ancient mill, and partly on a new site, it is not exempt. In a suit for tithes betwean a vicar and the occupier of a mill an old map of the parish, belonging to the lord of the manor, was not admiitted as evidence for the Defendant.
[1832] EngR 565, (1832) 5 Sim 243, (1832) 58 ER 328
Commonlii
England and Wales

Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.319512

Regina v James Saunders Randall And William Saunders: 20 Jan 1855

Stat, 5 and 6 w. 4, c. 50, s, 27, enacts that the highway rate shall be upon property rateable to the relief of the poor, ‘provided that the same rate shall also extend to such woods* mines, and quarries of stone, or other hereditaments, as have heretofore been usually rated to the highways.’ — Held, that mines not rateable to the relief of the poor, opened in a parish since the passing of that Act, are rateable to the highway rate, if mines of a similar description were before the Act usually rated to the highways in that parish.
[1855] EngR 97, (1855) 4 El and Bl 564, (1855) 119 ER 207
Commonlii
England and Wales

Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.292019

Thomas Houghton Hodgson v The Local Board Of Health For The District Of Carlisle: 26 Jun 1857

Real property within the district of a local Board of health cannot be assessed to a district rate, unless there be some person having such an occupation as would make him liable to the poor rate in respect thereof.
[1857] EngR 709, (1857) 8 El and Bl 116, (1857) 120 ER 43
Commonlii
England and Wales

Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.290455

Midlothian Assessor v Buccleuch Estates Ltd: 1962

(Lands Valuation Appeal Court) The landowner had several parcels of woodland and sawmills. They were on different sites, but worked together as a single business.
Lord Kilbrandon observed: ‘It has never yet been admitted that you can have a unit of valuation consisting of widely scattered heritable subjects connected only by some functional or commercial nexus, and I do not see why it should be. I do not think one is being merely old fashioned or obscurantist in insisting, in the conception of unum quid, on a fairly close physical relationship between what might be considered as parts of a commercial unit; one is, after all, attempting to value not a business but heritable subjects, and it may be that the precedents, which all insist on such a physical relationship, indicate a determination to preserve that essential distinction. . . Not only do I know of no precedent in valuation practice which could justify a functional approach to the problem such as is here sought to be made, but I am still of opinion that no such approach can in this case give a proper content to the whole words of the statute.’
Lord Kilbrandon
[1962] RA 257
Scotland
Citing:

  • Cited – Bank of Scotland v Assessor for Edinburgh 1890
    (Lands Valuation Appeal Court) The court considered the rating applicable where several banks retained nearby properties for the occupation of its staff. There were three categories of residential premises: (i) dwellings which were in buildings . .
    (1890) 17 R 839

Cited by:

  • Approved – Farmer and Another v Buxted Poultry Ltd HL 10-Mar-1993
    Buildings which were in fact far apart, could not be treated as being ‘occupied together with’ as agricultural buildings for rating purposes. . .
    Gazette 10-Mar-93, [1993] AC 369
  • Cited – Woolway v Mazars SC 29-Jul-2015
    The Court was asked how different storeys under common occupation in the same block are to be entered in the rating list for the purpose of non-domestic rating. In this case the firm’s two offices were in the same building, but the connection . .
    [2015] UKSC 53, [2015] 1 AC 1862, [2016] 1 All ER 299, [2015] WLR(D) 353, [2015] 3 WLR 386, UKSC 2013/0117

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 December 2020; Ref: scu.591253

University of Glasgow v Assessor for Glasgow: 1952

(Lands Valuation Appeal Court)
Held: Various buildings of the University which were physically separate from the main buildings, capable of being separately let and dispersed among buildings belonging to other proprietors, were properly entered on the valuation roll as separate subjects.
Lord Keith, using the Bank of Scotland Case, treated the case as a geographical one: ‘The common enclosure in many cases supplies a useful basis, or test, for a unum quid entry. It is the reason why a villa with its garden ground, or a mansion house with its policies, and any ancillary buildings are entered as a unum quid. The geographical conception has never been lost sight of in making up entries in the Valuation Roll, and in the case of John Leng and Co v Assessor for Dundee Lord Sands took occasion twice to refer to ‘the ordinary geographical arrangement followed in making up the Valuation Roll’. There may be cases where geographical unity has to be departed from, as where premises within what would otherwise be a single entity are separately let, or lands or buildings within a common enclosure are used for separate purposes. It is not perhaps possible to lay down general rules for all cases. Something must depend on particular circumstances. But the broad general principles are as stated.’
Lord Keith
1952 SC 504
Scotland
Citing:

  • Applied – Bank of Scotland v Assessor for Edinburgh 1890
    (Lands Valuation Appeal Court) The court considered the rating applicable where several banks retained nearby properties for the occupation of its staff. There were three categories of residential premises: (i) dwellings which were in buildings . .
    (1890) 17 R 839

Cited by:

  • Approved – Gilbert v S Hickinbottom and Sons Ltd CA 1956
    A large industrial bakery comprised a number of buildings in two blocks separated by a street. The Lands Tribunal held, overruling the valuation officer, that they constituted a single hereditament.
    Held: The valuer’s appeal failed. The . .
    [1956] 2 QB 40

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 December 2020; Ref: scu.591252

Burn Stewart Distillers plc v Lanarkshire Valuation Joint Board: 2001

(Lands Tribunal for Scotland) Premises under common occupation but situated on opposite sides of a main road constituted two hereditaments: ‘We consider that the emphasis on the geographical test is an aspect of recognition that lands and heritages are physical subjects. The underlying purpose is to provide a proper basis for a tax on property, not a tax on persons or businesses. Where the subjects share characteristics of function which, in a robust practical sense, support the use of a single term to describe the physical subjects, they can be treated as one unit. . . On the other hand, we are satisfied that the fact that certain heritable subjects function together as one business will, by itself, be insufficient to demonstrate that they are to be regarded as a unum quid in any physical sense. A ‘business’ is not a concept based on physical or heritable factors. Entry in the roll is based on identification of heritable subjects. The fact that one business may need to occupy two separate physical subjects does not change the character of the subjects. It is clear that undue emphasis on a business connection as evidence of functional connection between subjects could lead to a distinction for rating purposes between a business whose operating units were in close proximity and those whose operating units were, perhaps only slightly, more remote. There is no basis in legislation for such a distinction. We see no basis in fairness for it. We are not persuaded that there is a consistent practice which would lead to that result. If there is, we see no need to follow it . . In the present case there is a clear physical separation of the two subjects. They each have a clear curtilage and these curtilages are separated by a public road and pavements. . . Although, in a sense, little different from the interposition of a public road, the fact that the ratepayers do not have exclusive occupation of the land which provides their access to that public road and the intermittent presence at their gate of large, slow-moving vehicles belonging to another occupier, tends to enhance the impression of separation of the two subjects. A test based on appearance and impression may properly be treated as part of the geographical test. The two subjects have no unifying visual characteristics. There is nothing to indicate that they are operated together, far less that the physical presence of one is essential to the function of the other. . . Their physical characteristic as two distinct subjects is supported by the consideration that there is no real doubt that the subjects could be let separately.’
[2001] RA 110
Scotland
Cited by:

  • Cited – Woolway v Mazars SC 29-Jul-2015
    The Court was asked how different storeys under common occupation in the same block are to be entered in the rating list for the purpose of non-domestic rating. In this case the firm’s two offices were in the same building, but the connection . .
    [2015] UKSC 53, [2015] 1 AC 1862, [2016] 1 All ER 299, [2015] WLR(D) 353, [2015] 3 WLR 386, UKSC 2013/0117
  • Not approved – Woolway v Mazars SC 29-Jul-2015
    The Court was asked how different storeys under common occupation in the same block are to be entered in the rating list for the purpose of non-domestic rating. In this case the firm’s two offices were in the same building, but the connection . .
    [2015] UKSC 53, [2015] 1 AC 1862, [2016] 1 All ER 299, [2015] WLR(D) 353, [2015] 3 WLR 386, UKSC 2013/0117

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 December 2020; Ref: scu.591254