London and North Eastern Railway Company v Assessor of Public Undertakings. London Midland and Scottish Railway Company v Assessor of Public Undertakings
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 28 June 1938 |
| Date | 28 June 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 61. |
| Court | Lands Valuation Appeal Court (Scotland) |
Lands Valuation Appeal Court.
Ld. Fleming. Lord Pitman. Ld. Robertson.
ValuationSubjectsRailwayUnlet and unoccupied premises the property of a railway company but unconnected with any stationWhether to be separately entered in Roll of Assessor of Public UndertakingsLands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854 (17 and 18 Vict. cap. 91), secs. 21, 22Railways (Valuation for Rating) Act, 1930 (20 and 21 Geo. V, cap. 24), sec. 22.
Held that unlet and unoccupied subjects, the property of a railway company detached from any railway station, consisting of shops, offices, stores, workshops, stables and vacant groundsubjects which, under decisions pronounced in the previous year, could not be entered in the local Roll, and in respect of which no addition could be made to the cumulo receipts of the railway company, the basis of the valuation of the undertakingdid not, for the purpose of apportionment of valuation between the different rating areas, fall within the category of special premises in sections 21 and 22 of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854, that category being limited to premises in which a railway company carried on its business; and that they could not form the subject of any separate entry in the Roll of the Assessor of Public Undertakings.
London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor of Public Undertakings, 1937 S. C. 792, in so far as it decided that such subjects should be entered and valued in the Roll of the Assessor of Public Undertakings overruled.
ValuationSubjectsRailwayStorage accommodation in vault under station let to tradersWhether "so let out as to be capable of separate assessment"Whether part of railway undertakingRailways (Valuation for Rating) Act, 1930 (20 and 21 Geo. V, cap. 24), sec. 22 (9).
Three firms of traders, under agreements with a railway company, each acquired, in return for a yearly money payment, the right to occupy a specified number of square yards of storage accommodation in a vault under a station, a pro rata payment being made for any excess area occupied. In two cases the agreement in its form resembled a lease, and employed the words "let," "tenant," "rent"; in the third case the company "permitted" the trader to occupy and use the space, the trader paying for the "privilege." It was a condition of the agreements that the goods stored were to be conveyed on the company's railway. No part of the vault was marked out or allocated to any trader, and the railway company could move the goods from one part of the vault to another. Their servants had free access to the vault at all times; but the traders had no keys for the vault, and their servants visited the vaults only for the purpose of inspecting and removing goods.
Held that the areas which were the subjects of the agreements were not so let out as to be capable of separate assessment within the meaning of sec. 22 (9) of the Railways (Valuation for Rating) Act, 1930, and, accordingly, formed part of the railway undertaking.
The London And North Eastern Railway Company appealed to the Lands Valuation Appeal Court under section 22 (4) of the Railways (Valuation for Rating) Act, 1930, and sections 24 and 25 of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854, with respect to certain entries in the Railway Valuation Roll for the year 19381939 made up by the Assessor of Public Undertakings.
The note of appeal was in the following terms:"The appellants give notice of appeal against the values fixed and entered by the Assessor of Public Undertakings (Scotland) (hereinafter referred to as the Assessor) in the Valuation Roll made up by him for the year 19381939 in respect of (a) the unlet shops or premises specified and set out in Schedule I1 annexed hereto, and crave that the said subjects should not be entered by the Assessor as has been done by him, in respect that no part of the cumulo value for the second quinquennial period of the undertaking of the appellants, including light railways and their proportion of joint lines, so far as situated in Scotland, should be apportioned to the subjects in question; and (b) the reduction of 200 made by the Assessor from the cost, viz. 519,400, of the Waverley Station, Edinburgh, such reduction representing a gross annual value of about 6 in respect of certain spaces in vault No. 11 under the Waverley Goods Station of your appellants, which spaces the Assessor maintains are so let out as to be capable of separate assessment, this being disputed by the appellants, and they crave that the sum of 519,400 should be restored by the Assessor in his Roll for the year 19381939.[Cases 728 and 729.]
"The particulars of the grounds of appeal are as follows:
"1. Unlet shops or premises.Following upon decisions of your Lordships' Court, as contained in the cases of (a) London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor for GlasgowSCSC, 1935 S. C. 341, and 1936 S. C. 338; (b)London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor for StirlingshireSC, 1937 S. C. 254; and (c) London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC, 1937 S. C. 792 (Unlet Shops), the subjects referred to in the Schedule1 have been dealt with by the Assessor in making up his public undertakings Roll. In so dealing with the subjects, the Assessor has included his estimated cost thereof along with the cost of the stations on the undertaking of your appellants, their light railways, and their proportion of joint lines, and has entered separately the value of said subjects in the said Roll, said value being estimated as being a percentage of their cost as estimated by him.
"The method adopted by the Assessor in fixing the cost of the subjects referred to in the Schedule is to take the equivalent of
12 years' purchase of the annual rents received for each of the subjects at the time they were let, and to apply a percentage of such cost in arriving at the gross annual value of the subjects. As, however, for the year 19381939 the cumulo value of the undertaking is insufficient to permit of the usual 5 per cent on the cost of the stations to be applied, the Assessor has allocated the cumulo value of the undertaking of your appellants, including light railways and their proportion of joint lines, in Scotland, in the ratio which the cumulo value bears to the total cost of the stations including the subjects in question. That percentage works out for the current 19381939 year at about 31326 in place of the 5 per cent prescribed by statute. This percentage has been applied to the subjects referred to in the Schedule"The rentals formerly received and the total cost of the subjects referred to in the Schedule arrived at on the basis mentioned are set out in Schedule I hereto, the final result being that gross annual values amounting to 396 have been apportioned to the subjects by the Assessor in his Roll.
"The aggregate value of 396 is allocated separately by the Assessor to the rating authorities for the localities in which the particular subjects are situated.
"The subjects in question are all detached from the railway stations of your appellants, and it is maintained do not fall within the subjects described in sections 21 and 22 of the Valuation of Lands (Scotland) Act, 1854.
"The appellants maintain that, in making up his Valuation Roll for 19381939, which is the first year of the second quinquennial period in Scotland in terms of section 22 of the Railways (Valuation for Rating) Act, 1930, the Assessor has erred in placing gross annual values upon the said subjects in the manner indicated, and that, accordingly, the entries in respect thereof should be deleted from the Roll of the Assessor, there being no warrant for such entries contained in the Lands Valuation Acts, and especially in the Railways (Valuation for Rating) Act, 1930, and, in particular, section 22 thereof, having in view that (a) the said subjects are in fact unoccupied; (b) they are non-revenue producing; and (c) they are detached from the railway stations. Accordingly, the appellants maintain that the Assessor should be directed by the Court (1) to exclude from his Roll individual entries of the subjects in question and the separate values set against these as so fixed and allocated by him out of the cumulo, or (2), in any event, to exclude from his Roll all entries of separate values set against the said subjects.
"2. Spaces in vault No. 11 at Waverley Goods Station, Edinburgh.Certain spaces in vault No. 11 under the Waverley Goods Station, Edinburgh, of the appellants, are permitted to be used for the storage of goods by the following traders:
Trader. |
Space. |
Payment per Annum. |
(1) Allinson, Ltd. |
20 square yards. |
3, 10s. |
(2) Quaker Oats, Ltd. |
20 square yards. |
3, 10s. |
(3) The Shredded Wheat Co. Ltd. |
20 square yards. |
5, 10s. |
The vault has an area of about 465 square yards. In each case permission to use a certain amount of space...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
London Midland and Scottish Railway Company v Assessor for Glasgow
...North Eastern Railway Company and the London Midland and Scottish Railway Company, sustain the appeal and delete the entry from the Roll [1938 S. C. 751]. He further contended that, as the complaint was brought under section 6 of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Amendment Act, 1879, it could ......
-
British Transport Commission v Assessor for Edinburgh
...Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC, 1937 S. C. 793; London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC, 1938 S. C. 751. 1 Craies on Statute Law, (4th ed.) pp. 155, 159; Barras v. Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co.SCELR, 1933 S. C. (H. L.) 21, [1933] A. C. 2......
-
London, Midland and Scottish Railway Company v Assessor for Stirlingshire
...Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC, 1937 S. C. 792; London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC,1938 S. C. 751. 15 Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854 (17 and 18 Vict. cap. 91), sec. 16 1941 S. C. 587. 17 20 and 21 Geo. V, cap. 24. 18 [1936] A. C. 511, a......
-
London, Midland and Scottish Railway Company v Assessor for Edinburgh
...Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC, 1937 S. C. 792; London and North Eastern Railway Co. v. Assessor of Public UndertakingsSC, 1938 S. C. 751; London Midland and Scottish Railway Co. v. Assessor for StirlingshireSC, 1942 S. C. 340. 9 Station Hotel (Stirling), Limited, v. Assessor for ......