FC Brown Steel Equipment Ltd v Karl Hopkins

Decision date: 21 February 2022

Neutral citation: [2022] UKUT 51 (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 considered whether two industrial properties separated by a public road but linked by an enclosed conveyor bridge constituted a single hereditament for non‑domestic rating and what split‑site allowance should apply. The Tribunal held the buildings and bridge satisfied the cartographic/visual geographical test and allowed the ratepayer's merger proposal. It fixed the merged rateable value at £1,000,000 from 2 September 2013 with a 7.5% split‑site end allowance. The Valuation Officer's cross‑appeal against merger was dismissed.

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

A substantial, visible physical link that permits physical access between parts and creates cartographic/visual unity can satisfy the primary geographical test for a single hereditament even if the link is primarily for goods movement rather than regular pedestrian use; the geographical test should be decided by reference to the physical characteristics and visual/cartographic impression of the premises rather than by functional considerations tied to the occupier's business needs.

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 judgment indicates, as non‑binding comment, that lack of ownership of airspace or highway land is not decisive against treating linked sites as a single hereditament where a prominent connecting structure unifies them, and that valuing a merged hereditament may better reflect the value of connecting structures which could be undervalued or rendered a "bridge to nowhere" if parts were assessed separately.