Charlton-Merryweather (Listing Officer) v Hunt & Ors

For council tax purposes, a change in the physical state of a dwelling’s locality may include a change in traffic use which increases noise or pollution and reduces the value of nearby dwellings. The expression is not confined to visible alterations to buildings, roads or other physical features. The relevant question is the effect of local conditions on the value of the individual dwelling. The change may arise gradually, and a delay may occur between the change and the resulting reduction in value. A general increase in traffic does not prevent the change from being local for these purposes where its relevant effect is experienced in the dwelling’s locality.

The Listing Officer appealed against four decisions of the Manchester North Valuation Tribunal under regulation 32 of the Council Tax (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993. The tribunal had held that increased traffic, noise and pollution from the M61 motorway were capable of constituting a change in the physical state of the dwellings’ localities under section 24(10) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. The tribunal had adjourned the question whether the resulting valuations justified lower bands. The central issue was whether increased traffic use, without a visible physical alteration, could fall within the statutory expression.

1. The appeals were dismissed. The tribunal had been correct in law to hold that the increased noise and pollution caused by intensified motorway traffic were capable of falling within section 24(10) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

2. The phrase change in the physical state of the dwelling’s locality does not require a visible alteration to a building, road or other feature. In its ordinary context, “physical” may include effects experienced through the senses, including noise, vibration, smell and smoke. The relevant change may be the change from a road carrying little or no traffic to one carrying traffic, or the intensification of existing traffic use.

3. The court declined to adopt a narrow construction based on the wording of Schedule 6 paragraph 7(d) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988. That provision did not require a different construction of section 24(10). The statutory purpose was relevant: the provisions sought to produce fair council tax valuations, subject to the statutory limitations.

4. The fact that increased traffic may result from a nationwide trend does not prevent the statutory condition from being satisfied. The material consideration is the effect of the resulting local conditions on the value of the individual dwelling.

5. The relevant change may be gradual. There may be a buildup of effects or a delay between the physical change and the reduction in value. The statutory threshold is crossed when the circumstances have reduced the value sufficiently to justify an alteration of the banding, subject to the applicable procedural requirements. The tribunal’s wording was slightly inaccurate, but its substantive conclusion was correct.

6. Leave to appeal was granted. The Listing Officer undertook not to seek costs from the tribunal or interested parties. Time for appealing was set at 21 days from the beginning of the following term or receipt of the perfected transcript, whichever was later.

• Manchester North Valuation Tribunal: on 16 August 2006, held that increased traffic, noise and pollution were capable of constituting a change in the physical state of the dwellings’ localities and adjourned valuation issues.
• High Court (Administrative Court): dismissed the Listing Officer’s appeals and granted leave to appeal on terms concerning costs and time.