BMC Properties & Management Ltd v Jackson (Valuation Officer)

The valuation officer’s duty to maintain a rating list requires the list to remain accurate, not merely to preserve its state when first compiled. That duty, read with the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and the alteration regulations, permits the valuation officer to alter an existing list on his own initiative. Under regulation 14(2) of the 2009 Regulations, the circumstances giving rise to an alteration include an inaccuracy existing when the list was compiled. The regulation 14(5) postponement rule does not apply merely because the underlying change creating the inaccuracy occurred before compilation. Where the omission was ascertainable at compilation, the alteration may take effect from the first day of the list.

BMC owned a property used for short-term holiday letting. The property had been omitted from the 1990, 2000 and 2005 rating lists, although it should have been assessed as a non-domestic hereditament. The valuation officer added it to the 2005 list in March 2011, initially specifying an effective date in 2008 and later contending that the correct date was 1 April 2005.

The Valuation Tribunal for England upheld the inclusion from 1 April 2005. The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) dismissed BMC’s appeal: [2014] UKUT 0093 (LC). The Court of Appeal considered whether the valuation officer had power to alter an existing list without a proposal and whether regulation 14(5) prevented retrospective effect.

Appeal dismissed. Patten LJ gave the leading judgment, with which King LJ and Dame Janet Smith agreed.

1. Power to alter the list. Section 41 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 imposes a continuing duty to maintain the rating list in an accurate form. The word maintain does not mean preserving the list as an historic snapshot of the position on the compilation date. The statutory scheme would otherwise permit interested parties to alter the list during its currency while denying the valuation officer any corresponding power.
2. Statutory foundation. The duty in section 41 is performed in accordance with Part III of the Act. Section 55 empowers the Secretary of State to make regulations about alterations by valuation officers, and regulation 17 of the 2009 Regulations presupposes and regulates such alterations. If necessary, the power may also be implied as an incident of the section 41 duty. The established approach in National Car Parks Ltd v Baird was consistent with that construction.
3. Effective date. Regulation 14(2) applies to alterations correcting an inaccuracy existing on the day the list was compiled and to inaccuracies arising later. The phrase circumstances giving rise to the alteration is not confined to the underlying physical or factual event. It also includes a subsisting inaccuracy in the list, such as the omission of a rateable hereditament.
4. Regulation 14(5). The exception for circumstances whose date is not reasonably ascertainable does not apply to an inaccuracy existing when the list was compiled. Even on the wider construction, the omission was ascertainable by 1 April 2005 because the property’s commercial use was known to pre-date that date. The alteration could therefore take effect from 1 April 2005.

The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Appeal dismissed on 18 December 2015.
• Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber): Appeal from the Valuation Tribunal for England dismissed in a decision released on 11 March 2014, [2014] UKUT 0093 (LC).
• Valuation Tribunal for England: On 4 March 2013, upheld the alteration of the 2005 rating list to include the property from 1 April 2005.