Mitchelstown Co-Operative Society Ltd v Commissioner of Valuation

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 29 May 1989
• Date: 29 May 1989
• Docket Number: [1989 No. 181 SS]
• Court: High Court

Mitchelstown Co-Op Society v. Comr. for Valuation

Mitchelstown Co-Operative Society Limited

Appellant

and

The Commissioner for Valuation, Respondent and Cork County Council, Notice Party

[1989 No. 181 SS]

High Court

Practice - Case stated - Requirements of a case stated - Whether statement of evidence constitutes a statement of facts - Function of appellate court - Valuation Act, 1988 (No. 2), s. 5.

A case stated should contain a clear statement of the facts as found by the Tribunal, a statement of the inferences drawn from those facts, the contentions of the parties and the determination of the Tribunal as it is not the function of the appeal court to determine the facts of a case. A recital of all the evidence given before the Tribunal and a statement that the Tribunal accepted this evidence did not constitute findings of fact.

So held by Blayney J. in returning a case stated to the Valuation Tribunal for amendment.

Emerson v. Hearty & Morgan [1946] N.I. 35 followed.

Case mentioned in this report:—

Emerson v. Hearty & Morgan [1946] N.I. 35.

Case stated.

Following a determination of the Valuation Tribunal dated the 6th December, 1988, the appellant declared its dissatisfaction in writing on the 16th December, 1988, and requested that the Tribunal state a case for the consideration of the High Court pursuant to s. 5 of the Valuation Act, 1988. The case was stated by the Tribunal on the 16th March, 1989.

The matter came before the High Court (Blayney J.) on 24th April, 1989. Before arguing the merits of the case stated counsel for the appellant argued that it was unsatisfactory in form and Blayney J. heard the parties on that point as a preliminary issue.

Blayney J.

I think that the case stated is unsatisfactory and should be sent back to the Tribunal. Since my decision involves important principles of law I will deliver a written judgment.

Cur. adv. vult.

Blayney J.

This is an appeal by way of case stated under s. 5 of the Valuation Act, 1988, (the Act of 1988) against certain decisions of the Valuation Tribunal (the Tribunal). It is the first appeal brought under the Act of 1988. When the appeal came before me, it was submitted on behalf of the appellant that it would be difficult for this court to adjudicate upon the case in view of the form in which it was stated. Having considered the case stated and the submissions made on behalf of all the parties, I came to the conclusion that what the appellant was...