Pengelly v The Listing Officer
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- HIS HONOUR JUDGE WORSTER
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Darren Pengelly appealed against the Valuation Tribunal's decision maintaining his flat’s council tax band at C, arguing improper valuation methodology and non-compliance with the 1992 Regulations. The court upheld the Tribunal's decision, affirming the legal grounds and rationality of considering freehold property valuations comparable to 99-year leaseholds, given regulatory valuation assumptions.
JUDGMENT
HH JUDGE WORSTER:
1. This is an appeal brought by Mr Darren Pengelly against a decision of the Valuation Tribunal Pursuant to Regulation 43 of The Valuation Tribunal for England (Council Tax and Rating Appeals) Regulations 2009. As with many statutory appeals, it is an appeal on a point of law. It is not a rehearing on the merits. The test is essentially the public law test. There are two relevant principles in this case. Firstly whether the decision the tribunal made was so unreasonable as to be irrational, for example if there were simply no evidence to support its findings. Secondly has the decision maker applied the wrong principles of law, or (put in simple terms) asked itself the right question, or taken into account irrelevant matters Those are the two central issues of the public law test that arise in this case.
2. Mr Pengelly is the owner of a flat at 21 Gournay Road in Hailsham in East Sussex (“the property”). Unusually for a flat it is a freehold property. It is built over three garages. I have seen a diagram of it, and as Mr Pengelly's father has pointed out, he was keen to ensure that his son had a freehold property when it was purchased.
3. In June 2011 the property was entered on the list at band C. Mr Pengelly, assisted by his father, asked the Listing Officer to consider that. On 11 October 2012, the Listing Officer confirmed the decision in a letter in which he decided that the property was indeed within the range of band C. I have that letter at page 115 of the bundle.
4. Mr Pengelly appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. That is an expert tribunal, and it deals with appeals from decisions of Listing Officers. It has the power to look at the whole of the evidence and to make a finding of fact. In this case that was a finding as to which band this property should be placed.
5. That is an appeal on the merits. The parties put forward evidence and the Valuation Tribunal come to its conclusion on the basis of that evidence. That is in contrast to the appeal that is before me, which is, as I say, simply on a question of law. Mr Buley, who appears for the Listing Officer on the appeal, reminds me that the findings of fact are only challengeable if they are irrational; so far out of the band of what is reasonable that no tribunal properly directing itself could come to that conclusion.
6. The appeal was heard by two members, with a senior member in the chair. I have the written decision which was sent out dated 10 September