Belfast Poor Law Guardians v Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Belfast; County Councils of Antrim and Down, Appellants

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Judgment Date: 05 February 1910
• Date: 05 February 1910

Belfast Poor Law Guardians

and

Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Belfast; County Councils of Antrim and Down, Appellants (1).

Appeal.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL,

AND BY

THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.

1910.

Rating — Union comprising county borough and portions of counties — Re — valuation of county borough — Apportionment of Union charges — Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, sections 43, 65, sub — sect. 2.

In a Union which comprised a county borough and portions of two adjacent counties, the county borough was revalued under section 65, sub-section 1, of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, showing a substantial increase of valuation.

Held, affirming the judgment of the King's Bench Division, that the apportionment under sub-section 2 of that section was to be made in proportion to the rateable value of each part of the Union on the valuation of the county borough in force immediately before the revaluation, and on the valuation of the respective county portions in force at that date.

Appeal, by leave of the Court of Appeal, by the defendants, the County Councils of Antrim and Down, from an order of the King's Bench Division made on the 17th June, 1909.

The proceedings in this case were commenced by a writ of summons, at suit of the Guardians of the Poor of the Belfast Union as plaintiffs, against the Lord Mayor, aldermen, and citizens of Belfast as defendants, claiming £25,771 5s. for rates payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs.

A special case was stated by the parties under order XXXIV for the opinion of the Court. The material parts of the case were as follows:—

On the 15th July, 1899, the defendants applied to the Lord Lieutenant under section 65 of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, for a revaluation of rateable hereditaments within the city of Belfast. A warrant to the Commissioner of Valuation

was issued by His Excellency, and the revaluation was made, but not completed until the 1st June, 1905. In the meantime the former valuation of the city was annually revised, and the rates were struck on the former valuation as so revised up to and including the year 1905.

Prior to the revaluation coming into effect, the valuation of the city, according to the valuation in force on the 3rd April, 1905, so revised, was £1,271,170 6s. According to the revaluation it was £1,396,027 9s., and as revised up to the 1st March, 1909, it was £1,505,272 18s.

The Belfast Poor Law Union comprises the city of Belfast and portions of the counties of Antrim and Down. Prior to the revaluation coming into force, the union charges were apportioned in proportion to the rateable value of each divided part of the union, under section 43 of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, according to the Valuation in force at the time when the demand of the guardians was made.

By their annual estimate and demand made on the 15th January, 1909, the plaintiffs demanded that the defendants should pay during the financial year ending the 31st March, 1910, £96,090, as their proportion of the total union charges; the apportionment being calculated on the valuations in force at the date of the said demand. The defendants objected that the charges were apportionable under section 65 (2) of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, in proportion to the respective values of the divided parts of the union according to the valuations existing in 1905, immediately before the revaluation of the city came into force. At meetings on the 27th February and the 1st March, 1909, between the Chairman of the Board of Guardians and the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Finance Committee of the Belfast Corporation to discuss the matter, it was stated that the Board of Guardians were advised to adhere to their apportionment, but presented an amended estimate and demand for £95,959.

The sum of £25,771 5s. claimed in the writ was made up as follows:—£22,208 5s., being one quarter of £88,833, in respect of general charges; and £3,563, being one half of £7,126, in respect of repayment of loans.

The question reserved for the opinion of the Court was, “Whether, upon the true construction of section 65 (2) of the Local Government Act, 1898, the said union charges for the year ending the 31st March, 1910, are apportionable (as the plaintiffs contend) between each part of the said union in proportion to the rateable value of the said city of Belfast, according to the said revaluation of the 1st June, 1905, and the rateable values of the respective county portions of the said union according to the valuations in force at that date; or whether the said charges are apportionable (as the defendants contend) in proportion to the rateable value of the said city of Belfast according to the valuation in force immediately before the said revaluation came into force, and the rateable values of the respective county portions of the said union according to the valuation in force at that date” (1).

The special case was listed for the 1st June, 1909, when the Court, Palles, C.B., and Johnson, J., without argument, adhered to their decision on the second question in R. (Belfast Corporation) v. Belfast Poor Law Guardians, and an order was drawn up of which the curial part was as follows:—

“The Court is of opinion, that upon the true...