Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Limited v. Russell (Valuation Officer), (1999)
Linked as:
Extract
Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Limited v. Russell (Valuation Officer), (1999)
HOUSE OF LORDSLord Steyn Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Millett OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENTIN THE CAUSECOVENTRY AND SOLIHULL WASTE DISPOSAL COMPANY LIMITED(APPELLANTS)v.RUSSELL (VALUATION OFFICER)(RESPONDENTS)ON 25 NOVEMBER 1999LORD STEYNMy Lords,I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speech of my noble and learned friend Lord Hope of Craighead. For the reasons he has given I would dismiss the appeal.LORD COOKE OF THORNDONMy Lords,I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speeches prepared by my noble and learned friends Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Clyde. For the reasons given by them I, too, would dismiss this appeal.LORD HOPE OF CRAIGHEADMy Lords,This appeal is concerned with an entry in the non-domestic rating list relating to a hereditament at Bar Road, Coventry which is known as the Coventry Waste Reduction Unit. The appellant, Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Limited, is the owner and operator of the hereditament. The respondent, Anthony Russell, is the Valuation Officer for the Coventry City Council area.On 1 April 1990 the respondent made two entries in the rating list relating to the appellant's premises. The first, which was listed as Assessment No. 13007, was in respect of subjects described as "Refuse Destructor and Premises", the rateable value of which was £610,000. The second, which was listed as Assessment No. 15215, was in respect of subjects described as "Pipeline and Appurtenances", the rateable value of which was £38,500. On 29 November 1993 the respondent issued a notice that Assessment No. 13007 had been altered with effect from 26 February 1993 so as to reflect structural alterations to the hereditament by increasing the rateable value to £1,150,000. The appellant appealed to the Coventry and Solihull Valuation Tribunal on the grounds that the two assessments should be merged into one, and that the combined rateable value of the hereditament should be reduced by applying to it the formula for the determination of rateable value which had been prescribed by the Electricity Generators (Rateable Values) Order 1989 (S.I. 1989 No. 2474) as amended.The Valuation Tribunal held that the two assessments should not be merged and that the rateable value of the pipeline should not be altered. A small reduction was made to the rateable value for Assessment No.13007 by adjusting the respondent's valuation of the hereditament, which had been based upon the contractor's method of valua...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
