Lamb and Shirley Ltd v Bliss (VO)
Series: Rating Appeals ; [2001] RA 99-109(11)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: CA 5 April 2001. The appellants (L) sought to overturn an LT decision that the effective date of an alteration to a rating list to merge two hereditaments into a single hereditament should be the date the list was compiled rather than the date of the alteration, contending that the alteration was one which 'increases the rateable value shown in the list for the hereditament to which the inaccuracy relates' within the meaning of the Non Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993 reg 13(8A). "Held": The appeal was dismissed as the phrase referred to the hereditament as shown post alteration, there was no rateable value for the single hereditament shown in the list before the alteration and there was no basis for adopting the aggregate of the rateable value of the two constituent heriditaments as the rateable value of the whole when let as a single heriditament. Copy of judgement available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/9FABBD4B2B836E9D80256A260051B58B?OpenDocument| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS64191 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 113308-1001 |
CA 5 April 2001. The appellants (L) sought to overturn an LT decision that the effective date of an alteration to a rating list to merge two hereditaments into a single hereditament should be the date the list was compiled rather than the date of the alteration, contending that the alteration was one which 'increases the rateable value shown in the list for the hereditament to which the inaccuracy relates' within the meaning of the Non Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993 reg 13(8A). "Held": The appeal was dismissed as the phrase referred to the hereditament as shown post alteration, there was no rateable value for the single hereditament shown in the list before the alteration and there was no basis for adopting the aggregate of the rateable value of the two constituent heriditaments as the rateable value of the whole when let as a single heriditament. Copy of judgement available on http://porch.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/Search/9FABBD4B2B836E9D80256A260051B58B?OpenDocument