S & J Monk v Keith Newbigin (VO)
Decision date: 26 February 2014
Neutral citation: [2014] UKUT 14 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
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 whether the first-floor offices at Avalon House should be entered in the rating list at a nominal £1 because refurbishment works had rendered the hereditament incapable of beneficial occupation. The UT held the material day for a list alteration proposal was 6 January 2012 (the day the proposal was served) but found that on that day the physical state showed works had gone beyond repair so the repair assumption did not require reinstatement. The list was altered to a £1 entry as "building undergoing reconstruction" with effect from 1 April 2010; the appellant was awarded costs.
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: medium
Where a proposal to alter the list is based on a material change of circumstances, the material day is the day the proposal is served (regulation 3(7) applied to regulation 4(1)(b) proposals). Further, if on the material day the physical state of a hereditament shows systems or elements removed or destroyed so it is incapable of beneficial occupation and the works go beyond repair, the Schedule 6 repair assumption does not require assuming reinstatement to the former state; a nominal rating entry may be appropriate.
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: low
The notes indicate that the 1992 and 2009 Regulations need not be read together and that VOA practice notes and examples are helpful but not binding and must be rejected if incorrect; these observations were treated as non-essential guidance rather than necessary to the decision.