RAVENSEFT PROPERTIES Ltd v ASSESSOR for STRATHCLYDE REGION
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 22 March 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 28. |
| Date | 22 March 1991 |
| Court | Lands Valuation Appeal Court (Scotland) |
L.V.A.C.
Lords Clyde, Cullen and Coulsfield.
ValuationSubjectsCar parks serving shopping centre entered on valuation roll as separate subjectsWhether car parks pertinents of units in shopping centreWhether unum quid for valuation purposes.
Ratepayers owned a shopping centre consisting of 22 units, which were leased out, and car parks serving them. The assessor made separate entries in the valuation roll for the units and the car parks. The ratepayers appealed to the Lands Tribunal for Scotland arguing that the car parks were pertinents of the units and should be deleted from the roll, or alternatively, entered with a nil valuation as their value was included in the valuations of the shop units. The tribunal held that the actual rents of the units did include the values of the car parks, which was accepted as a matter of fact, but that the valuations struck by the assessor did not include those values, which, accordingly, should be entered as separate subjects at the appropriate net annual values. The tribunal also found in fact that the car parks were unlet and occupied by the ratepayers, subject to the tenants' rights of use in terms of their leases. The ratepayers thereafter appealed to the Lands Valuation Appeal Committee.
Held (off. the decision of the Lands Tribunal for Scotland) (1) that in identifying the extent or substance of subjects which are to be included as one unit in the roll, and accordingly in deciding the question whether subjects are to be recognised as a pertinent, rateable occupation had to be considered as a basic guide; (2) that where one car park served one subject and they were occupied together they could be valued as a unum quid; but (3) that there was a multiplicity of interests in the car parks in the present case so that they were necessarily in a distinct rateable occupation from any of the units; and (4) that on the facts found the ratepayers rather than the tenants as a body were in occupation of the car parks, so that they were the rateable occupiers and, as there had not been double assessment, a nil valuation was not appropriate; and appeal refused.
Ravenseft Properties Limited appealed to the Lands Tribunal for Scotland against a decision of the assessor for Strathclyde Region to enter on the valuation roll for that area certain car parks, on the basis that they served as pertinents to the Knightswood Shopping Centre in Glasgow. The appellant ratepayers also maintained that, estothe car parks should be entered in the valuation roll, they should be valued at nil. The Lands Tribunal dismissed the appeal.
The appellant ratepayers thereafter appealed to the Lands Valuation Appeal Court. The decision and reasoning of the Lands Tribunal appear sufficiently from the opinions of their Lordships in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court.
The cause called before the Lands Valuation Appeal Court, comprising Lord Clyde, Lord Cullen and Lord Coulsfield, for a hearing thereon.
At advising, on 22nd March 1991,
LORD CLYDE.The car parks which form the subject of this appeal serve the Kinghtswood Shopping Centre in Glasgow. The centre contains two supermarkets, 17 individual shops, two surgeries and a public house. All of these are owned by the appellants and each is leased out. The appellants sought to have the car parks deleted from the roll as a pertinent of the subjects comprised in the centre. Before the Lands Tribunal they also argued that if the car parks did fall to be entered in the roll they should be valued at nil. No attack otherwise was made on the actual figures of net annual value entered by the assessor. The Lands Tribunal decided that the car parks were properly entered in the roll at the assessor's figures of value. The ratepayers have appealed against that decision.
It is narrated in the case, indeed it is made a finding in fact in para. 12, that the ratepayers' evidence was in the main a critical examination of the assessor's net annual values of the shops in the shopping centre. Certainly it seems that much attention before the Lands Tribunal was paid to the rents and to the valuations. Thus the Lands Tribunal at the outset of their decision identify the first question as whether there has been double counting by the assessor in respect that he may have taken into account the value of the car parks in valuing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
VA10.3.020 – Square Management Ltd.
...of Valuation, Barron J., High Court, Unreported, 27th November 1992 12. Ravenseft Properties Ltd. v Assessor for Strathclyde Region (1991 S.C. 266) 13. Scottish Development Agency v Assessor for Fife Region (1987 14. Assessor for Central Region v Samuel Properties (Developments) Ltd (Unrepo......
- Coal Pension Properties Ltd v Assessor for Lanarkshire