BST & PT GRD FLR 1 NICHOLAS ROAD, W11 4AN
Offices and premises Decided 16 May 2025 CHG100886217 Gerald Eve LLP - CCA/Newmark Gerald Eve LLP
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 sought a split of the subject property from one hereditament into two hereditaments based on a change in occupation. The tribunal found that the proposal was made under regulation 4(1)(b) (material change of circumstances) but sought relief that would fall under regulation 4(1)(l) (split/merger). The tribunal dismissed the appeal as falling outside the scope of the proposal. Additionally, the tribunal found that applying the Woolway v Mazars principles, there would be eight putative hereditaments rather than two, as the tenant and landlord areas were separated by communal space to which the tenant had no exclusive possession.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was ADENA PROPERTY INVESTMENTS INC, represented.
Grounds argued
- Split or merge the assessment · decisive
- Change of circumstances
- Change of circumstances
- occupational change
- Evidence
- floor plan photographs, lease agreement
- Cases cited
- Woolway (VO) v Mazars; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson (VO)
- Hearing
- 24 April 2025
Similar decisions
- 4TH FLR 1, BREAKERS PLACE, W11 4EX — Allowed in part, 11 Mar 2026
- 45, HARRINGTON GARDENS, SW7 4JU — Allowed in part, 29 Sept 2025
- UNIT 301 GRAND UNION STUDIOS, 332 LADBROKE GROVE, W10 5AD — Allowed in part, 8 Jan 2025
- 110, OLD BROMPTON ROAD, SW7 3RA — Allowed in part, 28 Oct 2024
All decisions in Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea · Offices 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 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.