Michael Stanuszek v Dawn Bunyan (Listing Officer)
[2023] EWHC 3275 (Admin)
Ludgate House Limited v Andrew Ricketts (Valuation Officer) & Anor
14 February 2023
[2023] UKUT 36 (LC)
Upper Tribunal
A building was occupied by temporary residents while waiting to be redeveloped. A disagreement arose about whether it should pay business rates or council tax. The court decided the building owner was responsible for business rates, and the amount of those rates was correct.
Key Facts
- •Ludgate House, a former office building, was occupied by 'property guardians' while awaiting redevelopment.
- •The material day for rating purposes was July 1, 2015.
- •The guardians occupied the building under temporary licenses from VPS (UK) Ltd.
- •The Valuation Officer initially deleted Ludgate House from the non-domestic rating list.
- •Southwark challenged the deletion, leading to appeals.
- •The Court of Appeal determined that Ludgate House Limited (LHL) was in rateable occupation of the entire building.
- •The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) had to determine the valuation approach, valuation figure, and effective date of the Valuation Officer's alterations.
Legal Principles
Reality principle in rating valuation
SJ&J Monk v Newbigin [2017] UKSC 14
Mode or category of occupation is a material factor in valuation
RF Williams (Valuation Officer) v Scottish & Newcastle Retail Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 185
Definition of composite hereditament
Local Government and Finance Act 1988
Definition of domestic property
Local Government and Finance Act 1988
Valuation of composite hereditaments
Schedule 6, paragraph 2(1A), Local Government and Finance Act 1988
Effective date of alterations to rating lists
The Non-Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2009
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed
The building was a single hereditament on the material day. The valuation officer's alterations were valid, effective from July 1, 2015, and the rateable value remained at £3,390,000.