The VO’s case in these appeals
The VO’s case in these appeals
The VO argues in the appeal that the VTE was wrong both in its assessment of the valuation of the properties in Category A condition and in the methodology it adopted in relation to the Category B fitting out, so that the assessment was too low in each case. In relation to the Shoosmiths Property, given that the 2017 List is closed the VO argues that the assessment of a rateable value of £640,000 should be restored but asks the Tribunal to decide whether its preferred methodology for the assessment of the value of the property in Category B condition is correct, and to say what that value should be. As to the Mando Property the VO submits that the assessment should be increased to a rateable value of £54,000 on the basis of its preferred methodology.
We can set that out in a little more detail as follows:
- 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)