M'Jannet v Assessor for Stirling
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 01 March 1882 |
| Docket Number | No. 10. |
| Date | 01 March 1882 |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Lee, Lord Fraser.
Valuation-roll—Power of Judges to review evidence of comparative value in a locality—Proof.—
Valuation—House with adjuncts—Principle of valuation.—
Question, how far, when the evidence has been recorded, the Appeal Judges are to consider the whole valuations of similar subjects within the district for the purpose of ascertaining, by a balance of evidence, whether the assessor, in his valuation of a particular subject, has arrived at a correct result upon the question of amount, as compared with other subjects.
Opinion (per Lord Fraser) that where premises consist of a house and adjuncts the assessor ought to value the whole as one subject. Case 22.
At a meeting of the Magistrates and Town-Council of the burgh of Stirling, on 12th September 1881, Mr John D. M'Jannet, of Woodlands, Stirling, appealed against the following valuation:—
| Description of Subjects. | Situation. | Proprietor. | Occupier. | Yearly Rent or Value as estimated by Assessor. |
| House, Offices, and Garden. | Woodlands House. | John Douglas M'Jannet, Woodlands. | John Douglas M'Jannet. | £110. |
The appellant craved that £80 should be fixed as the annual value of the premises.
The appellant required that the evidence to be given in support of the appeal should be taken in shorthand, which was agreed to. The appellant examined the assessor and various witnesses on oath.
It appeared that Woodlands was a self-contained villa with grounds on the side of one of the main roads leading out of Stirling, being one of a continuous row of villas. There was a large conservatory adjoining the house, with which it had internal communication. There was also a stable, coach-house, and gardener's dwelling-house, and a large vinery in the grounds. The whole premises were occupied by the appellant.
The assessor in his evidence stated that he had entered the house and premises connected therewith on the roll at £110, and that this was made up by valuing the dwelling-house at £72, stable, coach-house, and hayloft £10, conservatory £8, vinery £16, gardener's house, consisting of room and kitchen, £4—being in all £110, and he considered that this was a correct valuation as compared with other houses in the neighbourhood of Woodlands, and that the house could, in his opinion, be let for that rent.
The appellant on the evidence maintained;—(1) That the property could not be let as a whole...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woolway v Mazars
...bank buildings, and therefore no part of the unum quid. The assessor in support of the view he has adopted referred to the case of M'Jannet, 10 R 32, but I do not think that that case has any application here. It was decided in that case that the conservatory, stables, and outhouses connect......