VA88.0.081 -85 – R & H Hall Plc

• Appeal Number: VA88.0.081
• Year: 1990
• Date: 21 June 1990
• Court: Valuation Tribunal
• Respondent: Commissioner of Valuation
• Appellant: 85 – R & H Hall Plc

Appeal No. VA88/0/081 - 85

AN BINSE LUACHÁLA

VALUATION TRIBUNAL

AN tACHT LUACHÁLA, 1988

VALUATION ACT, 1988

R & H Hall Plc APPELLANT

and

Commissioner of Valuation RESPONDENT

RE: Jetties and Silos, Lot Nos. 19c, 19i, 19b, 19k and 19j, Tideway of River Suir, County

Borough of Waterford

Property not properly listed and Quantum

B E F O R E

Paul Butler Barrister (Acting Chairman)

Mary Devins Solicitor

Brian O'Farrell Valuer

JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL

DELIVERED ON THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 1990.

It is proposed to deal with all five of the above appeals in this judgment.

By notices of appeal dated the 16th and 17th August 1988, in relation to appeals Nos. 88/81,

88/82 & 88/83, the appellants appealed against the determination of the Commissioner in fixing

rateable valuations of the above described hereditaments, on the following grounds, viz;

1. That the valuation is excessive, inequitable and bad in law.

2. That the said valuation has been made without and/or in excess of jurisdiction.

2

3. The property was never properly listed or included in the list for Revision of Valuation.

4. The subject is situated in:

V.O. Lot: Tideway of River Suir

E.D./Ward: West Ward Currently Borough of Waterford

outside the boundary of 19 Dock Road, and the Commissioner of Valuation did not have

jurisdiction to value or include same in the valuation of V.O. Lot: 19, Dock Road.

In relation to Appeals Nos. 88/84 & 88/85, in addition to the above grounds of appeal, two

further grounds of appeal were set out:

5. That the rateable valuation is bad in law, in that rateable valuations have been allotted to,

or attributed to, items which are not rateable hereditaments or alternatively, in arriving at

the Net Annual Value, the Commissioner of Valuation has erred in law in including

therein the value or values of items which are not rateable hereditaments.

6. That the Commissioner of Valuation has erred in law in including in the valuation or

assigning an annual value or rateable valuation to non rateable plant and machinery.

In the course of his written submission dated the 7th March 1990, Mr Desmond M Killen,

F.R.I.C.S. I.R.R.V., who is a Director of Messrs Donal O'Buachalla & Co. Ltd., stated that,

following discussions between the parties, quantum is no longer in issue.

The hearing took place in three stages. The initial hearing was on the 14th March, 1990, a

resumed hearing on the 20th & 21st March, 1990 and a third and final hearing on the 21st May,

1990. All three hearings took place in Dublin.

Prior to the first hearing, précis of the evidence that would be submitted by Mr J.V. Murphy,

B.E., Mr Sean Walshe, M.I.I.E., and Mr T.M. Thomas, B.Agr.Sc., M.Sc. were made available to

the Tribunal and these are attached hereto as Appendices A, B and C respectively. The Tribunal