Image from Google Jackets

Wakefield City MDC v Huzminor Investment Developments Ltd

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1990) 10 EG 76-80(3)Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: QBD 8 May 1989. The appellant council challenged the court`s decision that the empty property rate payable by (H) should be reduced by 25% of the full rate on the grounds of hardship . This right to appeal to the Crown Court was established by Investors in Industrial Commercial Property Ltd v Norwich CC (1986) under General Rate Act 1967 s7 . H was a small property investment company which in 1987 only added £411 to its reserves. Payment of rates as they stood would deplete these reserves by £4,000. The loss in profit was seen to be due to the properties lying empty. However the company was able to pay a management company, made up of its directors, £18,000 and still make a profit of £411 and keep £27,000 in reserves. Appeal allowed on the grounds that if the reduced rate of £2,000 would not have represented a hardship for the company then neither would the full rate of £4,000 taking the meaning of hardship to be whether the company would find it difficult to pay the bill.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS42450 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 36903-1001

QBD 8 May 1989. The appellant council challenged the court`s decision that the empty property rate payable by (H) should be reduced by 25% of the full rate on the grounds of hardship . This right to appeal to the Crown Court was established by Investors in Industrial Commercial Property Ltd v Norwich CC (1986) under General Rate Act 1967 s7 . H was a small property investment company which in 1987 only added £411 to its reserves. Payment of rates as they stood would deplete these reserves by £4,000. The loss in profit was seen to be due to the properties lying empty. However the company was able to pay a management company, made up of its directors, £18,000 and still make a profit of £411 and keep £27,000 in reserves. Appeal allowed on the grounds that if the reduced rate of £2,000 would not have represented a hardship for the company then neither would the full rate of £4,000 taking the meaning of hardship to be whether the company would find it difficult to pay the bill.