Commissioner of Valuation v Sligo Harbour Commissioners

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Judgment Date: 30 June 1898
• Date: 30 June 1898

COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION

and

SLIGO HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS

Appeal.

Rating — Exemption — Property "dedicated to or used for public purposes" — Sligo Harbour Commissioners ——— Statute, interpretation of —

Belfast Harbour CaseIR [1897] 2 I. R. 516.

Birkenhead Docks CaseENR 2 El. & Bl. 148.

Brown v. BuchananIR [1894] 2 I. R. 334.

Londonderry Bridge CaseUNKIR I. R. 2 C. L. 577.

Mersey Docks Case 11 H. L. Cas. 443.

Mills v. JenningsELR 13 Ch. D. 648.

Mr. Justice Gibson's judgmentIR [1897] 2 I. R. 528.

Pugh v. Golden Bridge Co.ELR 15 Ch. D. 330.

Smith's CaseELR 11 Ch. D. 579.

The Limerick CaseUNKIR I. R. 6 C. L. 432.

Tyne Commissioners v. ChirtonENR 1 E. & E. 516.

214 THE IRISH REPORTS. [1899. COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION v. SLIGO HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS (1). .Rating—Exemption—Property " dedkated to or used for public purposes"— Sligo Harbour Commissioners—Poor Law (Ireland) Act, 1838 (1 4- 2 Vict. c. 56), s. 63—Valuation Acts, 1852 and 1854 (15 4- 16 Vict. c. 63, sections 15, 16; 17 4- 18 Vict. c. 8, sect. 2)—Statute, interpretation of Supreme Court of Judicature (Ireland) Act, 1897 (60 Vict. c. 17). The Commissioner of Valuation having included the property of the Sligo Harbour Commissioners in the revised lists of rateable property for the year 1896, the Commissioners appealed to the County Court Judge of Sligo, who allowed the appeal, but, at the request of the Commissioner for Valuation, stated a case for the opinion of the Queen's Bench Division. The Sligo Harbour Commissioners were incorporated by that name by the Sligo Borough Improvement Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. cxlvii., local), s. 24, and the harbour was by the same Act vested in them. This Act was amended by the Sligo Harbour Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Vict. c. xxxv., local), which gave the Sligo Harbour Commissioners powers to acquire lands, to execute works, to levy tonÂnage duties and rates on goods, and to borrow moneys, which, together with the revenue of the port, were to be applied in erecting and improving the quays, wharfs, and docks, in payment of the working expenses of the Commissioners, in paying the interest on the moneys borrowed, in providing the requisite annual instalments or appropriations for paying off the principal thereof, and in mainÂtaining the works of the Commissioners, and generally in improving the port and harbour : Held (affirming the decision of the Queen's Bench Division), that the proÂperty of the Sligo Harbour Commissioners was " dedicated to or used for public purposes," and was within the exemption of the Valuation Acts. Guardians of Londonderry Union v. Londonderry Bridge Commissioners (I. R. 2 C. L. 577) followed. APPEAL by the Commissioner of Valuation from a judgment of the Queen's Bench Division on a case stated by the Chairman of Quarter Sessions for Sligo for the opinion of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Valuation. The Sligo Harbour Commissioners were incorporated by the VOL. IL] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. 215 Sligo Borough Improvement Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. c. cxlvii., Appeal. local) s. 24, and the harbour was by s. 65 vested in them. 1898. The said Act was amended by the Sligo Harbour Act, 1877 COMAIR. OF VALUATION (40 & 41 Viet. c. xxxv., local) which gave the Harbour Commis- v. sioners powers to acquire lands (s. 55), to execute works (s. 62), to 8LeiGolimitil.B. levy tonnage duties (s. 68), and rates on goods (s. 102), to borrow moneys (s. 110), which together with the revenue of the port were to be applied as in the Act directed (ss. 116 and 117) (1). Previously to the year 1895 the property of the Harbour Commissioners had been distinguished in the Valuation Lists as being of a public nature, and was consequently exempt from all assessment for the relief of the destitute poor, and from Grand Jury and County rates. Before the 27th November, 1896, the Clerk of the Poor Law Union of Sligo transmitted to the ComÂmissioner of Valuation a list of the property in the said Union which, in the opinion of the Board of Guardians of the said Union, required revision, among which was set out the property of the Harbour Commissioners which was thereupon transferred from the list of premises of a public nature to the list of rateable hereditaÂments. Within twenty-eight days after the receipt of such reÂvised lists by the Clerk of the Sligo Union, the Harbour ComÂmissioners being aggrieved by the valuation of their property, delivered to the Clerk of the Sligo Union a notice objecting to the revised valuation on the ground that the revenue and property so valued was of a public nature, and should be distinguished as such in the Valuation Lists as being exempt from taxation. The (1) Sect. 116—All principal money borrowed by the Commissioners shall be applied by them in deepening and improving the said port and harbour, and in erecting and improving the several quays, wharfs, docks, and other conÂveniences, and for carrying into execution the several other intents and purposes of this Act relating thereto. Sect. 117—All money to be received or collected by the Commissioners from rates and dues, and all revenue of the Commissioners coming to them by virtue of this Act, shall be applied—First, in payment of the working and establishÂment expenses of the Commissioners ; secondly, in paying the interest on moneys borrowed by the Commissioners ; thirdly, in providing the requisite annual instalments or appropriations for paying off the principal thereof ; fourthly, in maintaining the works of the Commissioners, and generally in improving the port and harbour. 216 THE IRISH REPORTS. [1899. Appeal. Commissioner of Valuation declined to alter the valuation, and the 1898' Harbour Commissioners appealed to Quarter Sessions for Sligo. COMMR. OF The case was argued before the County Court Judge, who allowed VALUATION V. the appeal, but at the request of counsel for the Commissioner of SLIGO HAM. Commas. Valuation stated a case for the decision of the Queen's Bench Co Division. In the Queen's Bench Division, counsel for the Commissioner of Valuation admitted that the case was undistinguishable from the Belfast Harbour Case (1), and explained that the case had been stated in order to obtain the decision of the Court of Appeal under 60 Vict. c. 17. The Queen's Bench accordingly, without arguÂment, affirmed the decision of the Chairman of Quarter Sessions, and the Commissioner of Valuation appealed. Henry, Q. C., and J. F. Vesey Fitz Gerald, for the appellant : A harbour cannot be said to be dedicated to public purposes ; it is only used by a particular portion of the public. Moreover, harbour works, if the harbour turned out a success, would bring in a profit to those who constructed them. The right of any persons to use it is not as members of the public, but because they pay dues : Birkenhead Docks Case (2) ; Tyne Commissioners v. Chirton (3). That distinguishes this case from the Londonderry Bridge Case (4), where the ultimate trust of the tolls was the abolition of tolls on the bridge altogether, so as to render the bridge free to the public. Moreover, the section of the public who would use a harbour is limited compared with those who would use a highway, and a harbour is not a highway. The Valuation Acts were not passed for the purpose of imÂposing fresh burdens ; but the General Valuation Act, 9 & 10 Vict. c. 110, was passed because it was found that the different Unions had different principles for Poor Law valuation. Then came 15 & 16 Vict. c. 63, ss. 16, 17 ; and 17 Viet. c. 8, s. 2. This latter section does not use the words " public purposes," but " of a public nature and occupied for the public service." Morris, J., held that this merely translated the judgment of the House of Lords in the Hersey Docks Case (5). That case decided that public purposes (1) [18973 2 I. R...