Dunfermline Corporation v Assessor for Fife
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 18 July 1962 |
| Date | 18 July 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 34. |
| Court | Lands Valuation Appeal Court (Scotland) |
Lands Valuation Appeal Court.
Lord Patrick. Lord Sorn. Lord Kilbrandon.
Valuation—Value—Evidence of value—Appeal to Valuation Appeal Committee against Assessor's valuation—Onus of proof—Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act, 1956 (4 and 5 Eliz. II, cap. 60), sec. 6 (4).
An appeal was taken to a Valuation Appeal Committee against the gross annual value of a dwelling-house proposed by an Assessor. At the hearing of the appeal, evidence was led on either side of the values placed on comparable accommodation in various localities. The Committee, in dismissing the appeal, stated that they had considered all the evidence adduced before them, and were of opinion that the appellants had failed to discharge the onus resting upon them of displacing the Assessor's valuation.
Held (1) that in appeals to Valuation Appeal Committees under the 1956 Act, a ratepayer appealing against an assessment must initially show that there is a case to try by stating the grounds of his appeal and leading evidence in support of it; but this having been done, and both parties having presented their cases to the Committee, there was not any presumption in favour of the Assessor's proposed valuation, and the Committee must in general decide the matter on a balance of probabilities: and (2), that reading the present case as a whole, the Committee had not erred in law by assessing the evidence upon the incorrect view that there was a presumption in favour of the Assessor's valuation.
Observed that if the considerations on either side were evenly balanced, or if the Committee were equally divided, their decision would require to be given against the appellant.
At a meeting of the Valuation Appeal Committee for the County of Fife, Dunfermline Corporation appealed against an entry in the Valuation Roll for the Burgh of Dunfermline proposed for the year to Whitsunday 1962. The entry was in respect of a dwelling-house at 23 Wardlaw Crescent, Dunfermline, and showed a gross annual value of £54. The appellants proposed that the gross annual value should be reduced to £46. It was agreed that the appeal in respect of this house would be a test case, the determination of which would govern appeals in respect of some thirty-five thousand local authority houses in Fife. The Committee having dismissed the appeal, the appellants expressed dissatisfaction and asked for a case to be stated on appeal to the Lands Valuation Appeal Court.
The case set forth that the following facts were held by the Committee to be proved or admitted or within their knowledge:—"(1) The local authorities referred to above had all independently appealed on the ground that the valuations proposed by the County Assessor in respect of their houses were too high. (2) The conjoining of appeals by the above local authorities followed on a conference held at Kirkcaldy on 22nd August 1961. According to a report of that conference, accepted as a correct record of the proceedings, the appeal was taken to meet the suggestion of the Secretary of State for Scotland that, before he could comprehensively examine the results of valuation within the county, the parties should first take advantage of any remedies open to them through the present legal procedure in appealing to the Valuation Appeal Committees. It was stated at that conference that “if the appeals succeeded it would be expected that the result would have a wide bearing upon other valuations and would be the first step in the effort to have the valuation of the County of Fife reduced generally from the point of view of ensuring that all the local authorities within the County receive an equitable allocation of the Exchequer Equalisation Grant.” A copy of the report of the said conference was produced. (3) Houses owned by local authorities which are actual appellants represent eighty-one per centum of the total number of such houses. If those houses owned by local authorities which are supporting the appeal financially are taken into account, the percentage is ninety-four point five, leaving the number of houses owned by authorities taking no part in the matter as five point five per centum of the total. (4) Prior to the aforesaid report of the conference of 22nd August 1961, no expert advice on valuation of any of the authorities' houses had been obtained. (5) The house which is the subject of appeal is a three-apartment flat in a two-storeyed block of flatted houses, with four flats to a block. It is built of brick with a slated roof and was erected in 1936. It was selected by theconsortium of local authorities referred to above and accepted by the County Assessor as suitable for the test case. A photograph of this house was produced. (6) In the Fife valuation area there are 101,826 houses. Of these 58,797 are privately owned and of that number 54,897 are not under appeal and some 3900 are still under appeal. Houses owned by local authorities number approximately 43,000 and of these some 35,000 are under appeal. Thirty-eight per centum of the total number of houses in Fife, both privately and publicly owned, are under appeal. (7) The Valuation Appeal Committee have approved the Assessor's valuations in the case of 3152 houses, and modified 26. (8) In approaching the question of the valuation of houses in the Fife valuation area, in terms of section 6 of the Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act, 1956, the Assessor found that by far the largest number of houses in that area, built within the last fifty years or so, were four-apartment houses built for the Fife County Council, the various Town Councils or by private builders. He decided to take one four-apartment house and value it and relate every other house thereto. He chose for that purpose a house, No. 36 Cooper Ha', Lochgelly, a four-apartment, semi-detached house of the cottage type. All houses in Fife have accordingly been valued on the same basis. (9) There was no evidence of any instance of a rent in Scotland fixed in the conditions of section 6 (4) of the Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act, 1956. (10) When the Assessor made his valuation of the aforesaid house in Lochgelly there were 8857 privately-owned houses in Fife, let to tenants. Of these 7957 were still “controlled” and 907 “decontrolled.” Of those de-controlled 559 still remained at the controlled level, 345 had been slightly increased and 3 reduced. As a result of this analysis of all rented private houses in the valuation area there was produced...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lands Valuation Appeal Courtby Stated Case Hewlett Packard+rolls Royce Plc+teknet Electronics+mackays Stores+total Repair Solutions V. Renfrewshire Assessor+renfrewshire Assessor+renfrewshire Assessor+renfrewshire Assessor+renfrewshire Assessor
...factor, or by proceeding on an incorrect principle (Miller v Ass for Glasgow [1962] RA 433; Dunfermline Corporation v Ass for Fife 1962 SC 321; Ass for Fife v Dunfermline Cricket Club [1962] RA 461). The Appeal subjects [22] The appeal premises were the following: Appellant Address Gross ar......
-
B And Q Plc V. Assessor For Dunbartonshire & Argyll & Bute Valuation Joint Board
...their respective valuations, it was for the VAC to weigh them up and make its decision (Dunfermline Corporation v Assessor for Fife, 1962 SC 321, Lord Patrick at p 329. Decision [17] I propose to your Lordships that we should refuse the appeal. LANDS VALUATION APPEAL COURT, COURT OF SESSION......
-
Belhaven Brewery Group Plc v Glasgow City Assessor
...appellants. The appellants appealed to the Lands Valuation Appeal Court. Cases referred to: Dunfermline Corporation v Assessor for FifeSC 1962 SC 321 Drybrough & Co Ltd v Assessor for Strathclyde 1982 SLT 426 Textbooks referred to: Armour Valuation for Rating (Haddow and Docherty eds, W Gre......
-
Belhaven Brewery Group Plc V. Glasgow City Assessor
...turnovers of his comparisons was inadequate. The onus on both matters lay with the Assessor (Dunfermline Corporation v. Assessor for Fife 1962 SC 321, Lord Patrick at p. 329; Drybrough & Co. Ltd v. Assessor for Strathclyde 1982 SLT 426, Lord Avonside at pp. 427-428; Armour, Valuation for Ra......