Duxbury v Bell(VO)
Language: English Series: Rating Appeals ; 1992 RA 147-156(6)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: LT (LVC/431/90) 5 June 1992. Ratepayer (D) appealed against decision of the VCCT that pens used for breeding mink were properly included in valuation list and liable to be rated. The main issue between the parties was whether mink pens were agricultural buildings within Rating Act 1971 s2(1)(a). Ruled that the buildings were not exempt as agricultural buildings as mink were not held to be livestock under this section of the Act. It had been agreed by the parties that if the appeal failed that the values of £600 gv and £470 rv should be reduced to £450 gv and £347 rv.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS46838 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 59659-1001 |
LT (LVC/431/90) 5 June 1992. Ratepayer (D) appealed against decision of the VCCT that pens used for breeding mink were properly included in valuation list and liable to be rated. The main issue between the parties was whether mink pens were agricultural buildings within Rating Act 1971 s2(1)(a). Ruled that the buildings were not exempt as agricultural buildings as mink were not held to be livestock under this section of the Act. It had been agreed by the parties that if the appeal failed that the values of £600 gv and £470 rv should be reduced to £450 gv and £347 rv.