The Assessor For Lothian V. Mrs. Agi Holland+mr Alan Sutherland
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Mackay of Drumadoon,Lord Hardie,Lord Justice Clerk |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] CSIH 53 |
| Docket Number | XA58/09 |
| Published date | 29 June 2010 |
| Court | Court of Session |
| Date | 29 June 2010 |
| SECOND DIVISION, INNER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION | |
| Lord Justice Clerk Lord Hardie Lord Mackay of Drumadoon | [2010] CSIH 53 XA58/09 XA59/09 OPINION OF THE LORD JUSTICE CLERK in the Appeals by THE ASSESSOR FOR LOTHIAN Appellant; against (1) MRS AGI HOLLAND; (2) MR ALAN SUTHERLAND; Respondents: _______ |
(Non Participating Party - The Respondents)
29 June 2010
Introduction
[1] The Assessor for Lothian has appealed under section 82(4) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (the 1992 Act) against a decision of the Lothian Valuation Appeal Committee (the Committee) dated 5 March 2009 by which it upheld appeals by Mrs Agi Holland and Mr Alan Sutherland against the entries of their respective houses at 54 and 52 Carnbee Park, Edinburgh at band F in the Council Tax List (the List).
The statutory framework
Valuation for Council Tax
[2] The 1992 Act provides inter alia that the amount of council tax payable in respect of a dwelling is to be calculated by reference to the valuation band in which the dwelling is entered in the List (ss 70-74). Section 84 of the Act requires the assessor to compile on 1 April 1993, and thereafter to maintain, a valuation list showing each dwelling in the relevant area and the valuation band applicable to it. Section 86 provides inter alia that the valuation for this purpose shall be carried out on such assumptions and in accordance with such principles as may be prescribed.
[3] The valuation principle and the assumptions on which it must be applied are prescribed in regulation 2 of The Council Tax (Valuation of Dwellings) (Scotland) Regulations 1992 (SI No 1329) (the 1992 Regulations). Regulation 2, so far as relevant to these appeals, provides as follows:
"2.-(1) For the purposes of valuations under section 86(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and valuations carried out in connection with proposals for the alteration of a valuation list, the value of any dwelling shall be taken to be the amount which the dwelling might reasonably have been expected to realise if it had been sold in the open market by a willing seller on 1st April 1991, having applied the assumptions mentioned in paragraph (2) below ...
(2) The assumptions referred to in paragraph (1) above are -
(a) that the sale was with vacant possession ...
(d) that the dwelling was in a state of reasonable repair ...
(3) In determining what is 'reasonable repair' in relation to a dwelling for the purposes of paragraph (2) above, the age and character of the dwelling and its locality shall be taken into account."
Alteration of the valuation bands
[4] Section 87 of the 1992 Act empowers the assessor to alter the List. The exercise of that power is governed by The Council Tax (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) (Scotland) Regulations 1993 (SI No 355) (the 1993 Regulations). Regulation 4, so far as relevant to these appeals, provides as follows:
"4.-(1) No alteration shall be made of a valuation band shown in the list as applicable to any dwelling unless ...
(b) the local assessor is satisfied that -
(i) a different valuation band should have been determined by him as applicable to the dwelling; or
(ii) the valuation band shown in the list is not that determined by him as so applicable."
The background to these appeals
[5] It came to the notice of the assessor that the houses of the respondents were in band E, whereas all of the other 25 houses in the Carnbee Park development were in band F. The assessor carried out a re-assessment and decided that these houses should be in band F.
The hearing before the Committee
[6] The evidence for the assessor was in two parts. First, the assessor's witness said that in 1997, shortly after these houses were built, they were entered in band E by a straightforward error. The original valuation sheets showed an intention to enter them in band F. Second, the witness gave detailed evidence to demonstrate that the banding in band F was correct. The evidence consisted of photographs, location plans, floor plans, a detailed schedule of 21 open market sales of comparable houses in the period 1990-1992 and an analysis of the sales evidence.
[7] The first respondent submitted evidence of house price indices for Scotland and Edinburgh and of comparison sales in other housing developments in the same postcode area. She submitted that those of the assessor's comparisons that came from the Murrays, a housing development about two-thirds of a mile to the south, should be disregarded, being from a different postcode area. The second respondent adopted her evidence.
The decision of the Committee
[8] The Committee summarised the evidence and set out its reasons as follows.
"The Assessor produced -
1 A booklet relating to Mr Sutherland's house running to fifteen pages; and
2 A similar and almost identical booklet relating to Mrs Holland's house running to fifteen pages.
Mrs Holland produced a Location Plan; a letter ... with her various submissions attached to it; a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Assessor For Lothian Valuation Joint Board Against Mark Mclaughlin
...to its conclusions (Assessor for Lothian v Martin 2010 SC 749, per Lord Justice-Clerk Gill at para 10; 13 Assessor for Lothian v Holland 2010 SC 743, per Lord Justice-Clerk Gill at para 12). Mr Gill asked the court to accept Mrs Fraser’s evidence and hold that the banding should be Band D. ......
-
Assessor for Lothian Valuation Joint Board v McLaughlin
...SC 245; 2003 SLT 327; [2003] RA 167; [2004] RVR 34 Inland Revenue Commissioners v Clay [1914] 3 KB 466 Lothian (Assessor for) v Holland [2010] CSIH 53; 2010 SC 743; 2010 SLT 1149; [2010] RA 510 Lothian (Assessor for) v Martin [2010] CSIH 54; 2010 SC 749; 2010 SLT 1173; [2010] RA 518 McKenzi......
-
The Assessor, Lothian Valuation Joint Board V. Colin Campbell+mrs Marion Campbell
...is satisfied that he should have determined a different valuation band for the dwelling in the first place (cf Ass for Lothian v Holland, 2010 SLT 1149). It does not apply where, as here, there has been a material increase in the value since the original entry was made. [10] The Committee a......
-
The Assessor For Lothian V. Mr And Mrs K G Martin+mr A S Forrest
...at 29 Delta Drive and 26 Galt Road, Musselburgh, at band C in the Council Tax List. Cases referred to: Assessor for Lothian v HollandSC [2010] CSIH 53; 2010 SC 743; 2010 GWD 24-459 The case called before the Second Division, comprising the Lord Justice-Clerk (Gill), Lord Hardie and Lord Mac......