View report page

64
incidents as in the case of persons other than the Overseers who receivenotice
of appeal, has reference only to appeals against poor rates, (which may
be brought in the Metropolis on grounds other than those relating to the
Valuation of the property): and in the present case the Assessment Committeewere
respondents in the appeal at the Special Sessions, not by virtue of that
section, but by virtue of section 33 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869.
There is in my opinion nothing in the latter Act to give the Assessment
Committee expressly, or by implication, a right of appeal to the London Quarter
Sessions, sitting as Assessment Sessions under that Act, against the decision of
the Special Sessions reducing the Valuation of Mr. Nalder's property.
Any ratepayer may appeal to the Quarter Sessions against the decision of the
Special Sessions, and so may the Overseers of the Parish with the consent of
the Vestry; but the Assessment Committee would not in my opinion have any
locus standi on such an appeal, and would have no power to charge any costs
which they might incur on the Common Fund of the Union ; though if they
were to appear as appellants and no objection to their appearance were made, and
if an order to pay costs were made against them under Sec. 39 of the Act of
1869, and such order were not quashed upon certiorari or otherwise, I do notthink
that the Auditor could subsequently go behind the order of the Court
and disallow the payment made in pursuance of it.
(Signed) ALEXANDER GLEN.
New Court, Temple,
30th December, 1890.
The particulars of expenditure which formed the basis of Valuation in this,
case, were admitted by Counsel for the Respondent to be as follows:—
Amount of Purchase money
£5,000
0
0
Amount expended in improvements since
purchase
2,500
0
0
Ground Rent
45
0
0
ORDINARY VALUATION.
With reference to this subject we had reason to believe that the method
hitherto adopted in arriving at the gross values was not entirely satisfactory,
and consequently, on the 24th February last, we had the subject under consideration.
It appeared to us that the intention of the Statute 32 and 33 Vic.,
cap. 67, had not been adhered to in the past, in so far that the amount at which
premises might be expected to let to an annual tenant (paying the usual rates
and taxes) should be the gross value ; but the practice had been to take the
exact figures in every case of the amount of rent paid. We were advised that
this course was not in accordance with the ruling of Lord Denman, and consequently
Resolved—
"That the Vestry Clerk be and he is hereby instructed to grant an
"appeal to any ratepayer whom he has reason to believe is not rated upon
"the principle set forth in the Statute, viz.:— 'What the house might be
"expected to let for per annum, tenant's rates and taxes and tithe's com"mutation
excepted,' and in future to oppose at Assessment Committee
"meetings, the rent being taken as conclusive evidence, where he has reason
"to believe the rent is untrustworthy evidence, and does not represent the
" gross value of property."