[2024] UKUT 351 (LC)

Before the VTE both appeals by Network Rail were heard together and decided on the same basis. At the invitation of Mr Daniel Kolinsky KC, who appeared for Network Rail, the panel applied the familiar principles explained in the Southern Railway case and, more recently, in Cardtronics to determine, as between Network Rail and JC Decaux which was in “paramount” occupation of the advertising rights. For this purpose it considered a later Rail Advertising Concession Agreement entered into between the parties in 2018, the 2010 Agreement not having been disclosed to the Valuation Officer by Network Rail. The later Agreement is not different in any relevant respect from the 2010 Agreement in force at the material day.

The VTE concluded that under the terms of the 2018 Agreement Network Rail retained sufficient control over the advertising rights that they could not be said to have been “let out” to JC Decaux in the sense it took to have been intended by section 64(2), 1988 Act. Additionally, the purpose for which Network Rail occupied the advertising sites was a railway purpose so that the sites formed part of the railway hereditament in respect of which Network Rail was assessed in the central list.