| 000 | 01014cab a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS58107 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1997 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u82939 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aMitchell v Fearnley (VO) | ||
| 260 | _c1997 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aRating & Valuation Reporter _v[1997] RVR 259-260(2) |
||
| 520 | _aLT 31 October 1997. Ratepayer M held an underlease on a purpose built lock-up shop which was incorporated in a shopping mall. Refurbishment of the mall meant that M experienced difficulties in using the rear loading bay of the property as members of the public also used it for access. M contended an end allowance of 27%. "Held" end allowance should be allowed at 5%. | ||
| 650 | _aASSESSMENTS | ||
| 650 | _aDISABILITIES | ||
| 650 | _aEND ALLOWANCE | ||
| 650 | _aMITCHELL V FEARNLEY VO | ||
| 650 | _aRATING APPEALS | ||
| 650 | _aRESTRICTIVE USE | ||
| 650 | _aSHOPS | ||
| 690 | _aRATING AND VALUATION-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c05/01/1998 | ||
| 999 |
_c52390 _d52390 |
||