Chris Wall & Anor v Valuation Tribunal for England
Decision date: 26 May 2020
Neutral citation: [2020] UKUT 166 (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 Upper Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear an appeal against the Valuation Tribunal for England's refusal to undertake a review of a 25 July 2012 decision fixing the rateable value of Induna stables, and whether a 7 August 2012 emailed request for review had been made in time. The Tribunal held there is no right of appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a VTE decision refusing to undertake a review and dismissed the appeal, but found the 7 August 2012 email was a timely review application that appears never to have been determined and recommended the VTE determine it.
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
The Upper Tribunal concluded that the statutory right of appeal (read against regulation 42(1) in context) is confined to appeals against VTE decisions disposing of appeals and does not extend to decisions refusing to undertake a review; accordingly no appeal lay to the Upper Tribunal against a refusal to review.
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 observed that the review power is intended to address specified procedural or similar irregularities and is not open-ended, and that where a timely review application is treated as an administrative matter and not referred to the VTE President it remains undetermined and should be dealt with by the VTE.