Irish Management Institute v Commissioner of Valuation

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Barron
• Judgment Date: 09 March 1990
• Neutral Citation: 1990 WJSC-HC 870
• Docket Number: 372 S.S./1989,[1989 No. 372 SS]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 09 March 1990

IRISH MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE v. COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION

BETWEEN

IRISH MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

AND

THE COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION

1990 WJSC-HC 870

372 S.S./1989

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis:

RATES

Hereditament

Valuation - Assessment - Principles - Lands - Administrative and training complex - Net annual letting value - Rateable valuation - Statutory purpose - Achievement of similar proportions between initial annual letting values and ultimate valuations placed on hereditaments having similar functions - Valuation (Ireland) Act, 1852, s. 11 - Valuation Act, 1986, s. 5 - (1989/372 SS - Barron J. - 9/3/90)

|Irish Management Institution v. Commissioner of Valuation|

Citations:

VALUATION ACT 1852 S11

ROADSTONE LTD V

COMMRS VALUATION 1961 IR 239

VALUATION ACT 1986 S5

VALUATION ACT 1986 S5(1)

VALUATION ACT 1986 S5(2)

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Barron delivered on the 9th day of March 1990.

2 This Case Stated relates to the valuation of the premises of Irish Management Institute at Balally, Dundrum Sandyford, County Dublin. In May 1978 the rateable valuation of these premises was upheld in the Circuit Court at the figure of £2,400. In the instant proceedings a rateable valuation of £2,400 was again placed on the premises by the Commissioner, but has been reduced by the Valuation Tribunal to £1,900. The premises comprise a large administrative and teaching complex in it's own grounds of thirteen acres. It was built in 1974 and consists of three interconnected low level buildings housing an administrative area, a library and a training area. Planning permission exists for the development of the administrative block for use as offices. There are extensive car parking facilities on purpose-developed tarmacadam surfaces.

3 The evidence before the Tribunal related essentially to the valuations of other premises and a comparison of the sums per square metre represented by such valuations. Evidence was given as to the valuations of other premises used for educational purposes including the valuation of Wesley College, a secondary school, the valuations of two new buildings erected in Trinity College Dublin, the valuations of F.A.S. training centres and the valuations of commercial offices. The Tribunal rejected the evidence of the valuation of Wesley College on the ground that the subject premises were not comparable to premises used as a school. It rejected the evidence of the valuations of commercial offices on the ground that the subject premises could only be adapted for commercial development in circumstances which would make no commercial sense. It also rejected evidence of the valuations of the F.A.S. training centres on the ground that such valuations were tied directly to commercial values. The Tribunal found that two recent additions to Trinity College Dublin, a new Library erected in 1969 and the Arts and Social Services Building erected in 1979 were the closest comparisons.

4 It decided that no distinction should be made between these university buildings and the Institute buildings based upon either the quality or the design of the buildings or their setting. The Tribunal then took into account that the valuation had to reflect the greater affluence of those taking the courses provided by the Institute as compared to students attending courses at Trinity College. It also attached importance to the existence of a planning permission for the development of the administrative block for use as offices.

5 The questions of law arising in the Case Stated are as follows:

6 2 "1. Whether the Tribunal in determining the rateable valuation properly applied Section 5 (2) of the Valuation Act 1986.

7 2. Whether the Tribunal in determining the rateable valuation came to a uniform figure having regard to the tone of the list.

8 3. Whether the comparisons adduced was such that a valuation upon 28p square metre would be justified without reference to the valuations of commercial hereditaments.

9 4. Whether the Tribunal applied the correct criteria when arriving at 28p per square metre in respect of the premises particularly having regard to the adoption of the Trinity College Dublin buildings as nearest comparable hereditaments."

10 These questions can be conveniently dealt with together.

11 The basic approach to the determination of valuations of rateable hereditaments for the purposes of the Valuation Code is to be found in Section 11 of the Valuation Act 1852. It requires a determination as a question of fact of the rent which a hypothetical tenant would pay for the hereditament taking one year with another. There is no one way in which...