Tribunals · Newcastle City Council · 2017 rating list

The Discovery Centre, Blandford House, Blandford Square, Blandford Square, NE1 4HZ

Museum and premises Decided 23 April 2025 CHG100380582 Lambert Smith Hampton - Leeds (Riverlake)

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed, leaving the value at the figure the Valuation Officer had already conceded.
Original RV£715,000
Ratepayer sought£1
VO conceded first£128,000−82% before the hearing
Tribunal decided£128,000

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant (Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums) argued that the Discovery Museum should be valued using the Receipts and Expenditure method, proposing an RV of £1 based on accounts showing a net loss. The Valuation Officer conceded the original RV of £715,000 was excessive and proposed £128,000 based on a percentage of receipts. The tribunal applied the R&E method, but included all available grant income (ACE and local authority funding) that the appellant had excluded, and determined notional admission receipts of £1,574,100 (using £10 per visitor, 40% turnaway effect, and 12.5% gift aid). With total receipts of £2,265,700 and expenditure of £1,908,296, this produced a divisible balance of £357,404, from which the landlord's 40% share yielded £142,961 (rounded to £128,000 remaining in the list). The tribunal rejected the appellant's narrow accounting treatment and dismissed the appeal as £128,000 was not excessive.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Trading receipts (pubs, hotels) · decisive
  • Valuation method
Evidence
Trading accounts, Expert report
Cases cited
Hughes (VO) v York Museums and Gallery Trust [2017] UKUT 200 (LC); Hughes (VO) v Exeter City Council [2020] UKUT 0007 (LC); Allen (VO) v Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums [2022] UKUT 206 (LC); Hoare & Anor v National Trust [1998] EWCA Civ 1525; Bluebell Railway Limited v Ball (VO) [1984] RA 113; BNPPDS Limited & BNPPDS Limited (Jersey) as trustees for Blackrock UK Property Fund v Ricketts (VO) [2022]
Hearing
10 March 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in Newcastle City Council · Pubs, hotels and leisure nationally

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 property

The tribunal’s decision in full

Download the PDF · Find it on valuationtribunal.gov.uk

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.