Darcy House 146, Queen Victoria Street, EC4V 4BY
Offices and Premises Decided 10 June 2021 25236539 Peter Hodkin
Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 3 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant sought deletion of three properties from the rating list on grounds of exemption as places of public religious worship under Schedule 5 paragraph 11 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988. The tribunal found that none of the three chapels qualified as places of public religious worship because there was insufficient evidence that members of the public had been given meaningful notice or invitation to attend services. Applying the test established in Broxtowe and Gallagher, the tribunal determined that the appellant failed to demonstrate that public religious worship took place at the material day, and appeals were therefore dismissed on all grounds.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Church of Scientology Religious Education College Inc, represented.
Grounds argued
- Relief or exemption · decisive
- Validity of the proposal
- Evidence
- Expert report, Earlier tribunal decisions
- Cases cited
- Gallagher v Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints; Broxtowe Borough Council v Birch; Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints v Henning; Colour Weddings Limited v Ritchie Roberts
- Hearing
- 26 May 2021
Similar decisions
- Unit 1, Athene Place, EC4A 3BQ — Dismissed, 28 Nov 2023
- Liverpool Street Railway Station, Liverpool Street, EC2M 7PY — Allowed, 1 Jun 2023
Is your own rateable value in line?
A free check compares a property with the assessments around it and says plainly whether there is anything worth pursuing.
Check a propertyThe tribunal’s decision in full
Decision © Crown copyright, published by the Valuation Tribunal Service under the Open Government Licence v3.0 and reproduced unaltered. This site does not index the names of private individuals that appear in decisions. Information, not advice.