[2007] EWLands RA_24_2004, 11 April 2007. The appellant (B) appealed against decisions by Valuation Officers (V) regarding rating assessments of two opencast coal sites. B's case for the valuation of one mine was based upon a business appraisal within a board meeting report which had been held in 2000. B's calculation for royalties per tonne of coal implied a lower rateable value. V argued that the business costings were of little use in a rates valuation as they were based on profitability and ability to pay. In respect of the other mine B again argued that a lower royalty could be expected, this time based on the historic royalty of coal from the mine and the royalty rate from other local and comparable mines. V argued that there were no directly comparable figures as both rates and coal royalties would need to be adjusted to match the historical data. "Held": The board report for the former mine did not refer to rent levels actually paid and as a commercially based valuation was not reliable for rate valuation purposes. Nor were the royalty comparisons reliable for the second mine. However there was some truth in B's assertion that its lower valuation just prior to privatisation had resulted in a higher rateable value. Appeal allowed in part.