Conclusions
Conclusion
As to the issue of principle in these two appeals, we agree with the VO that where the available comparables are of no assistance then cost is the only appropriate measure of value. We can go no further than that. The state of the evidence and the available argument did not enable us to determine the Category B rateable value for the Shoosmith’s property in circumstances where to do so would have had no effect on the rating list. As to the Mando Property, in this case we derived more assistance from the comparables than from the expert witness’s calculation of the amortised cost.
As to the appeals themselves, both succeed. As to the Shoosmiths Property the ratable value of £640,000 is to be restored. As to the Mando Property the assessment is arrived at by the product of an area of 493.5 m2 and a rate of £110 per m2. By our calculation that figure is rateable value £54,285 which we round to £54,000.
Mr Mark Higgin FRICS FIRRV Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke
9 July 2025
Right of appeal
Any party has a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal on any point of law arising from this decision. The right of appeal may be exercised only with permission. An application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal must be sent or delivered to the Tribunal so that it is received within 1 month after the date on which this decision is sent to the parties (unless an application for costs is made within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties, in which case an application for permission to appeal must be made within 1 month of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision on costs is sent to the parties). An application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, identify the alleged error or errors of law in the decision, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the Tribunal refuses permission to appeal a further application may then be made to the Court of Appeal for permission.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The legal and practical background
- The properties and the VTE decision
- The Mando Property
- The VTE decision
- The VO’s case in these appeals
- The Shoosmiths Property
- The Mando Property
- The Tribunal’s approach to valuation in these appeals
- The Shoosmiths Property in Manchester
- The rateable value of the Shoosmiths Property calculated by reference to the landlord’s payment for the cost of the Category B fitting out work
- Mr Brown’s calculation of the Category A value
- The comparable evidence for Category A lettings of Grade A office space in Manchester
- The comparable evidence for Category B lettings of Grade A office space in Manchester
- Our conclusions about the Shoosmiths Property
- The Mando Property in Liverpool
- The Category A rental market in Liverpool and the effective Category A rent for the Mando Property
- The amortised cost of the Category B fitting out at the Mando Property
- The Category B comparables
- The witnesses’ conclusions
- The Tribunal’s conclusion about the Mando Property
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 224 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png)