Appeal No. VA96/2/009
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Leinster Cricket Club APPELLANT RE: Clubhouse and Land at Map Ref: 136B, Rathmines
Road Lower, B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated 12th April, 1996 the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a rateable valuation of £220 on the above described hereditament. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal are that:- The property consists of a newly built clubhouse located off Rathmines Road Lower on a site of over 5 acres. The accommodation in the new clubhouse consists of changing rooms, showers, w.c's, stores - on the ground floor. On the first floor is a bar (capacity seated 80), function room, kitchen, games room and WC's. There are two indoor squash courts also located in the new clubhouse. The old bowling pavilion and stores are still intact. They are over 50
years old. There is also an equipment shed and a steel container in use
as a tool shed. The agreed areas are as follows:- The relevant valuation history is that the subject property was inspected and revised in spring 1995. In November, 1995 the valuation list was issued and a rateable valuation was assessed at £220. On 1st December, 1995 the occupier appealed to the Commissioner of Valuation. In January, 1996 the Appeal Valuer inspected the property and had negotiations with the appellants agent, Hennigan & Company. On 25th March, 1996 the Commissioner of Valuation issued his decision and there was no change in the rateable valuation. A written submission by Mr. Joseph Bardon, Dip. Environ. Econ., ARICS ASCS, of Hennigan & Company on behalf of the appellant was received on 29th August, 1996. In his written submission Mr. Bardon outlined the situation, description and construction of the subject premises. In his description of the accommodation at the premises Mr. Bardon described the old tool sheds as follows, store 236 sq.ft. and portacabin store 320 sq.ft. These two units have together an agreed accommodation of 556 sq.ft. In his written submission Mr. Bardon's opinion was that a fair rateable
valuation would be £170 using a net annual value basis as follows:- Using the old square metre basis Mr. Bardon arrived at a similar result for the rateable valuation, namely rateable valuation of £170. The main arguments advanced by Mr. Bardon in support of his opinion on
rateable valuation were:- Mr. Bardon's written submission contained a schedule of five comparisons. Mr. O'Connor's submission contained inter alia, comment on the grounds of the appeal, a description of the property and a valuation history. Mr. O'Connor's submission as to the rateable valuation of the subject
premises was as follows:- Mr. O'Connor's submission contained a schedule of three comparisons. Mr. Bardon argued that the portacabin shed of 320 sq.ft. was not linked to services and therefore not rateable. At a later stage in the hearing Mr. Bardon accepted that there was no statutory basis for this argument. He stated that his preferred comparison was the Mount Pleasant Lawn Tennis Club which was the nearest sports club to the appellant's premises and is similar in size. Mr. Bardon accepted that the valuation was arrived at under the old square metre basis. Mr. Bardon agreed that C.Y.M. Sports Club, his fifth comparison, operated in the same type of area as the subject premises. Mr. O'Connor for the respondent in his sworn testimony adopted his written submission as his evidence to the Tribunal. In his evidence he pointed out that Mr. Bardon uses different rates per sq.ft. as between the main clubhouse and the squash courts which are located in the same premises. Whereas Mr. Bardon's comparisons had a uniform rate per sq.ft. throughout. The Valuation Office in its written submission had used a uniform rate for the entire clubhouse. Mr. O'Connor argued that a location adjacent to the main street is not of relevance in the case of a sports club, which is not a retailing enterprise. He argued that the portacabin shed of 320 sq.ft. is permanently located on the ground and is therefore rateable. Mr. O'Connor did not accept that the clubhouse was of a basic construction and the expenditure on it was in the region of £1,000,000 including VAT and fees. Mr. O'Connor pointed out that he had not used any golf clubs in his comparisons. Again he stated that Mr. Bardon's preferred comparison is out of date being determined prior to 1988, that is the Mount Pleasant Tennis Club. Mr. O'Connor referred to the I.M.I. case which decided that in arriving at a rateable valuation regard had to be given to premises which are comparable, of similar function and whose valuations were made/revised within a recent period. Mr. O'Connor pointed out that Mr. Bardon's fifth comparison, C.Y.M. Sports Club, Terenure has part of its premises which is over thirty years old yet the net annual value was arrived at using £2.53 per sq.ft. Mr. O'Connor stated that the Valuation Office had sought comparative
premises in the immediate area. The E.S.B. Sports complex and the Riverview
Sports Club were the subject of Tribunal decisions, VA94/3/012 and VA91/4/005
respectively. The significance of these comparisons is that they are much
larger than the subject premises but devalue at a much greater rate per
sq.ft. than the rate placed on the appellant's premises. Determination: The Tribunal further considers that physical breakdown as prepared by
the Valuation Office of the subject premises is the most appropriate method
for arriving at a net annual value in this appeal. Accordingly the Tribunal
determines the net annual value and rateable valuation of the subject
premises as follows:- The Tribunal therefore determines that the rateable valuation of the subject premises is £200. |