Denis Coakley Company Ltd v Commissioner of Valuation

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: EGAN, J.
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1996
• Neutral Citation: 1995 WJSC-SC 4244
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 01 January 1996

1995 WJSC-SC 4244

THE SUPREME COURT

Hamilton, C.J.

O'Flaherty, J.

Egan, J.

65/69–91

DENIS COAKLEY & CO LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION

IN THE MATTER OF THE VALUATION ACTS,

1852 to 1874.

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ANNUAL

REVISION OF RATEABLE PROPERTY

(IRELAND) AMENDMENT ACT, 1860,

AS ADAPTED BY THE COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT, 1936.

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE VALUATION BASED UPON

R NO. 071/28297900X

LOT 4 MARINA MILLS, CITY QUAY WARD,

COUNTY BOROUGH OF CORK.

BETWEEN:

DENIS COAKLEY & COMPANY LIMITED/ARKADY FEED LIMITED

APPELLANT

-and-

THE COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION

RESPONDENT

Citations:

ANNUAL REVISION OF RATEABLE PROPERTY (IRL) (AMDT) ACT 1860 S10

ANNUAL REVISION OF RATEABLE PROPERTY (IRL) (AMDT) ACT 1860 S11

COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT 1936 S31(3)

ANNUAL REVISION OF RATEABLE PROPERTY (IRL) (AMDT) ACT 1860 S7

PFIZER CHEMICAL CORPORATION V COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION UNREP COSTELLO 9.5.89

CRONIN (INSPECTOR OF TAXES) V STRAND DAIRY LTD UNREP MURPHY 18.12.85 1986/1/385 1994 ITR 782

MCCAUSLAND V MINISTRY OF COMMERCE 1956 NI 36

BEAMISH & CRAWFORD V COMMISSIONERS OF VALUATION 1980 ILRM 149

Synopsis:

RATES

Hereditaments

Valuation - Assessment - Exception - Plant - Grain silos - Ancillary equipment - Conveyors and elevators - Whether plant complex was a manufactory - Whether silos were machinery - Annual Revision of Rateable Property (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1860, s. 7 - (65,69/91 - Supreme Court - 7/11/95) - [1996] 2 ILRM 90

|Denis Coakley & Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Valuation|

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Machinery"

Hereditaments - Valuation - Assessment - Exception - Plant - Grain silos - Ancillary equipment - Conveyors and elevators - Whether silos were machinery - (65,69/91 - Supreme Court - 7/11/95) - [1996] 2 ILRM 90

|Denis Coakley & Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Valuation|

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Manufactory"

Hereditaments - Valuation - Assessment - Exception - Plant - Grain silos - Ancillary equipment - Conveyors and elevators - Whether industrial complex was a manufactory - (65,69/91 - Supreme Court - 7/11/95) - [1996] 2 ILRM 90

|Denis Coakley & Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Valuation|

1 JUDGMENT of EGAN, J. delivered the 7th day of November 1995. [NEM Diss]

2 Three Appeals in respect of the property as set out in the title hereof were heard together by Judge Sean McD. Fawsitt, sitting as Judge of the Cork Circuit pursuant to the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 of the Annual revision of Rateable Property (IRELAND) AMENDMENT ACT, 1860, as adapted by the provisions of Section 31 Subsection 3 of the Courts of Justice Act, 1936.

3 The Appeals concerned the Appellants" Grain Handling Plant at Kennedy Quay, Cork. The Appeals concerned three different years (1977, 1979 and 1986). The total valuation on the property the subject matter of the appeals for each of the years was £535 and it was agreed between the parties that the said sum of £535 was on the basis of £28 on buildings, £487 on grain silos and £20 on a weighbridge. The Appellants" case was that the valuation placed by the Commissioner of Valuation on the grain silos and weighbridge should be struck out, the same constituting machinery for the purposes of the provisions of Section 7 of the above Act.

4 The learned trial Judge defined a "silo" as a group of bins located in a cluster. These are serviced by a common network of conveyors and elevators to feed and empty the bins. Bins are used for handling and storage of material to ensure that all such handling is totally automatic and no manual handling is required. The elevators and conveyors are located outside the bins.

5 The bins are filled with grain by the use of the elevators and conveyors. All the bins are interlinked by conveyors and elevators and there are facilities for filling and emptying every bin into any other bin. The bins have no function unless accompanied by the feeding and discharging equipment located outside of them. These mechanical elevators and conveyors discharge through a system of valving and spouting into the silo top.

6 Raw materials can be delivered to the bins using the conveyors and elevators. A sample of all materials entering the plant is taken. All such samples are then sent to the laboratory for analysis. The sampling is required to determine the properties of the ingredients to enable the Appellants to adapt the commodities for sale. Many customers require the blending of different ingredients together to provide feed or ration of guaranteed oil, protein and fibre content. Mixing and blending is achieved by turning the contents of two bins simultaneously into a third bin at predesignated proportions to achieve a consistency.

7 The conveyors, elevators, dust extractors etc. were not valued as they were accepted by the Commissioner of Valuation to constitute machinery. The Commissioner submitted that the handling plant did not constitute a manufactory for the purpose of section 7. It was further submitted that the silos did not come within the definition of machinery as no force was applied within the silos and no process was going on inside them. The conveyors and elevators had not, as stated, been rated.

8 It was submitted on behalf...