Hutchings v Cardiff County Council

On a statutory appeal limited to a question of law, the High Court will not revisit a tribunal’s factual assessment merely because the evidence could have supported a different conclusion. Whether a dwelling requires major repair work to render it habitable is a question of fact. The absence of a formal prohibition or improvement notice may be relevant evidence, but it does not determine habitability. Work needed to comply with fire-safety requirements is not necessarily work required to make a dwelling habitable. An appeal fails where the tribunal considered the relevant evidence and its conclusion was rational and legally available.

The claimant appealed under regulation 44 of the Valuation Tribunal for Wales Regulations 2010 against the decision of an appeal panel dated 21 February 2011. The panel had refused a Class A council-tax exemption for a vacant flat in Cardiff.

The exemption depended on whether the flat was vacant and required or was undergoing major repair work to render it habitable, or was undergoing structural alteration. The claimant relied principally on works identified by housing officers to address fire-safety requirements. The central issue was whether the panel had made an error of law in concluding that the flat was habitable and did not fall within either exemption.

1. The appeal was dismissed. Regulation 44 of the Valuation Tribunal for Wales Regulations 2010 permitted an appeal only on a question of law. It was not a merits-based appeal.
2. The question whether the flat required major repair work to render it habitable was a purely factual question. The tribunal had considered the description of the works, the housing inspector’s written evidence, the evidence that another flat was occupied while works were being carried out, and the claimant’s own evidence.
3. Work required to comply with new fire-safety requirements was not necessarily work required to render the flat habitable. The tribunal was entitled to conclude that the works could be carried out while the flats remained occupied and that the flat was habitable when the exemption was considered.
4. The absence of a formal improvement notice or prohibition notice was relevant evidence available to the tribunal. It was not determinative. The housing authority had not prohibited occupation, and the statutory exemption relating to premises whose occupation was prohibited did not apply.
5. The tribunal was entitled to find that the flat was neither undergoing nor had undergone structural alteration. There was ample evidence supporting its factual conclusions, and those conclusions were not irrational. No error of law was apparent.
6. The claimant was ordered to pay the defendant’s costs, summarily assessed at £1,570 inclusive of VAT.

1. Valuation Tribunal for Wales, appeal panel: decision dated 21 February 2011 refusing the Class A exemption.
2. High Court (Administrative Court): statutory appeal dismissed; the tribunal had made no error of law.