William Young v Commissioner of Valuation
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 20 December 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | VT/1/2018 |
| Court | Valuation Tribunal (NI) |
| Date | 20 December 2019 |
LANDS TRIBUNAL FOR NORTHERN IRELAND
LANDS TRIBUNAL AND COMPENSATION ACT (NORTHERN IRELAND) 1964
RATES (NORTHERN IRELAND) ORDER 1977
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL
VT/1/2018
BETWEEN
WILLIAM YOUNG – APPELLANT
AND
THE COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION – RESPONDENT
Re: 39A Carrowdore Road, Greyabbey
Lands Tribunal – Henry M Spence MRICS Dip Rating IRRV (Hons)
Background
1. Mr William Young (“the appellant”) and his wife, Roberta Young, built the property at 39A
Carrowdore Road, Greyabbey (“the reference property”) in and around 2004 and have been
in occupation there ever since.
2. The reference property has a gross external area of 333 square metres and a garage
extending to some 47 square metres. It has double glazed windows, full central heating and is
connected to all mains services.
3. Whilst the appellant had planning permission to build a house on the site, the planning
authorities considered that the house, as built, did not comply with the planning permission .
The reference property was therefore “unauthorised development” within the context of The
Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 (“the Planning Order”), which was the operative
legislation at the time of the build.
4. Subsequently, on 9th January 2004, the Department of the Environment (Planning Service)
issued an Enforcement Notice under the Planning Order. This Enforcement Notice required
the appellant and his wife to:
“(i) Remove the unauthorised building and all building materials and rubble arising
thereof from the land within 120 days from the date on which the Notice took effect,
namely 12th February 2004;
(ii) Reinstate the land to its original condition within 130 days from the date the Notice
took effect.”
In summary the Enforcement Notice required and still requires the demolition of the
reference property and the restoration of the site to its previous condition. The appellant and
his wife had the right to appeal the Enforcement Notice but did not do so.
5. The appellant and his wife have been convicted on several occasions for their failure to
comply with the Enforcement Notice. There therefore remains against them, or any
subsequent owner of the reference property, a statutory obligation to demolish the house
and restore the site.
6. Meanwhile, on 31st January 2005, the District Valuer had entered the reference property in to
the Valuation List with a capital value rates assessment of £370,000. The appellant paid the
rates liability in full up until June 2017.
7. On 3rd January 2014 the appellant had submitted an application to the District Valuer for
revision of the Valuation List rates assessment on the grounds that Planning Service had
served a Notice requiring the reference property to be demolished. On 12th June 2015 the
District Valuer issued a certificate declining to alter the capital value on the grounds that the
property was occupied and was therefore liable for rates.
8. On 18th June 2015 the appellant lodged an appeal against the District Valuer’s decision to the
Commissioner of Valuation (“the respondent”) on the grounds that the: “property was the
subject on an Enforcement Notice by DOE NI Planning in 2004. There can be no capital value
applied to a property which is illegal and under condemnation of demolition”.
9. The respondent declined to alter the capital value and a certificate to that effect was issued
to the appellant on 20th July 2015.
10. On 26th August 2015 the appellant issued an appeal against the respondent’s decision to the
Northern Ireland Valuation Tribunal (“NIVT”) on the grounds that “there cannot be a capital
value on a property which has been illegally constructed and subject to an Enforcement
Notice to demolish”.
11. On 26th July 2016 the respondent lodged his “Presentation of Evidence” with the NIVT which
made the following points:
(i) The effect of the statutory assumptions contained in the Rates (Northern Ireland)
Order 1977 (“the Rates Order”) was such that the respondent could not take into
account the lack of planning permission for the reference property.
(ii) The NIVT had already dealt with this point in the case of Adam Cochrane v
Commissioner of Valuation 30/14. In that case the appellant contended that his
property should have no capital value on the basis that it did not have planning
permission. The NIVT held that “it was bound by Schedule 12 paragraph 15 of the
Rates Order and to assume that there had been no relevant contravention of any
statutory provision, requirement or obligation which would effect the capital value
of the hereditament. Therefore the Tribunal must assume the property has the
necessary permission and the property has a value”.
To continue reading
Request your trial