Associated Cinema Properties Ltd v Hampstead Borough Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1944 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
Rates - Occupation - Empty dwelling-house - No physical possession - Intention to use as offices on the happening of uncertain event.
By an agreement in writing a company took for a term dwelling-houses so that they might have accommodation available for use as offices in the event of their premises being rendered unfit for use by enemy action or for use “owing to the exigencies of their business.” The company did not use the premises for any purpose, nor enter into physical possession of, nor place any furniture or other chattels on, the premises at any material time:—
Held, that a mere intention to occupy premises on the happening of a future uncertain event cannot, without more, be regarded as evidence of occupation, and, therefore, that the company were not in rateable occupation of the premises as they had never been in actual occupation of them.
APPEAL from Divisional CourtF1.
Hampstead Borough Council, as rating authority, made a complaint before Hampstead justices against Associated Cinema Properties, Ld., that they, being duly rated and assessed to general rates in respect of two dwelling-houses for which lawful demand had been made, had refused or neglected to pay them. At the hearing it was proved or admitted that the company had never used the dwelling-houses for any purpose; that the object of the company in becoming tenants of the dwelling-houses was to have accommodation available for offices in the event of their existing offices being rendered unfit for use by enemy action, or should they desire to use the dwelling-houses owing to the exigencies of their business; that by the written agreement of tenancy the company had undertaken to keep the premises in good and tenantable repair, order and condition, provided that they should not be under any liability for the maintenance, repair or preservation of the premises unless and until they should enter into possession of the same, and in the meantime the landlords were to be at liberty to take such action as they should consider necessary for such maintenance, repair or preservation; that the company had not entered into physical possession of the premises and the landlords had taken the steps necessary for the maintenance, repair and preservation thereof; that the company, by the tenancy agreement, agreed not to use the premises or any part thereof otherwise than for private dwelling-houses or for emergency offices in connexion with the business of the company; that no steps had been taken to adapt the dwelling-houses for use for emergency offices, but they were at all material times capable of being so used without any structural alterations; that at no material time had there been any furniture or other chattels on the premises; and that the rates had been duly made and demanded from the company, but not paid. The justices...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Briant Colour Printing Company Ltd Re
...v. Southwark Corporation (1909) 1 King's Bench, 78; Harter v. Overseers of Sal ford, 6 Best & Smith, 591, and Associated Cinema Properties v. Hampstead Borough Council (1944-) King's Bench page 412. In my judgment all those cases are distinguishable on their facts from the present case, on......
-
Bexley Congregational Church Treasurer v Bexley London Borough Council
...occupation. While those two cases were, no doubt, rightly decided, they have to be read nowadays in the light of Associated Cinema Properties Ltd. v. Hampstead Borough Council (1944) 1 K. B. 412. In that case a company during the war took accommodation and kept the premises empty. Their int......
- Sheafbank Property Trust Plc v Sheffield Metropolitan District Council
-
Verrall v Hackney London Borough Council
...will not support a distress made upon that person in respect of the property which he does not occupy." 19 In Associated Cinema Properties Ltd. v. Hampstead Borough Council (1944) 1 King's Bench 49(D.C.), and 412(C.A.) the issue was whether the limited company had been in rateable occupatio......