NARAYAN CHANDRA CHAKRAVORTY v HER MAJESTY’S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS
Decision date: 30 April 2014
Neutral citation: [2014] UKUT 184 (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 the valuation on 31 March 1982 of the appellant’s leasehold interest in No. 98 Sutherland Avenue and the appellant’s undivided beneficial share. The tribunal valued the whole leasehold at £7,032 (capitalised net rent £3,267 plus marriage value £3,765) and held the appellant’s beneficial share was 50% subject to a 10% discount for lack of control, giving £3,164. The Freeholder/ freehold valuation put forward by the appellant was treated as irrelevant to the proper issue and untested written expert evidence was given little weight.
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 binding ratio is that the interest to be valued is the legal/beneficial interest actually held on the valuation date (not a different freehold interest asserted by the claimant), untested written expert evidence has limited weight compared with tested oral evidence, and marriage value can be included in a leasehold valuation but must be estimated, apportioned and discounted for risks of realization.
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 (obiter) that long‑term indexation of a 2002 sale is unreliable for valuing a specific property as at 1982, and that developers’ market behaviour and vendor disposal policy at the valuation date can materially affect appropriate yields and remunerative rates.