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 repair. The officer submitted that the question of whether a property continues to be a hereditament, according to the relevant legal regime, does not depend on whether any repairs which may be needed can be economically carried out. It was submitted that a dwelling that is capable of repair remains a hereditament even if it would not necessarily be economic to carry out those repairs.
The Panel concluded that: ‘a dwelling cannot be deleted from the valuation list simply because of disrepair, regardless of the extent of that disrepair.’ Singh J said: ‘It seems to me that the tribunal fell into precisely the error of law which the respondent has stressed before me ought not to infect this area of law. They confused the two concepts which the respondent has been at pains to stress to me ought not to be confused, namely the concept of the existence, or continued existence, of a hereditament on the one hand, and the distinct question of the proper valuation of a hereditament on the other hand.’
The decision was erroneous and should be remitted to the tribunal.
Singh J
[2011] EWHC 2824 (Admin), [2012] PTSR 1313
Bailii
Valuation Tribunal for England (Council Tax and Rating Appeals) (Procedure) Regulations 2009 43, Local Government Finance Act 1992 22, Council Tax (Situation and Valuation of Dwellings) Regulations 1992
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Post Office v Nottingham Council CA 1976
The court provided a definition of what is a hereditament. Browne LJ said: ‘the question is whether the building as a building is so far completed as to be capable of occupation or ready for occupation for the purposes for which it is intended – as . .
Cited – 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, . .
Cited – Burke v Broomhead Admn 2009
The court heard applications relating to the inclusion of the property in the valuation list, including an assertion that the tribunal had wrongly interpreted the valuation evidence presented to it in arriving at its decision. The claimant said that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Rating
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.466305