Andrew Wilson-Smith (Trading as Crumpet Limited) v Kevin Attrill (Valuation Officer)

Decision date: 20 July 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKUT 287 (LC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

This appeal concerned valuation for rating of a coffee shop premises at 66 Northcote Road as at 1 April 2005, focusing on whether a centrally located kitchen should be treated as ancillary or included in the zoned retail area and whether an internal ramp should be included in NIA or excluded. The Tribunal held the kitchen could be removed by minor works and, given A1/A3 permission, should be valued as part of the zoned retail area; the ramp formed usable NIA and attracted a 7.5% end allowance. The appeal was allowed and the rateable value fixed at £22,000 effective 1 April 2005.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

Where a non-structural partition encloses a kitchen, that space may be treated as removable by minor works for rating purposes and therefore valued as part of the zoned retail area if the hypothetical tenant could and would remove it under the rebus sic stantibus assumption; and a ramp is part of NIA if it can be used for any sensible purpose connected with the premises, with disadvantage from a significant ramp or floor-level change appropriately reflected by an end allowance rather than by excluding the area from NIA.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The Tribunal noted that the RICS Code is a measurement, not a valuation, code and that common-sense interpretation together with recent judicial guidance on "usable area" inform measurement; it also observed that planning use class/permitted uses (here A1/A3) is a relevant consideration when applying the hypothetical tenant assumption.