Unit 44 County Mall, RH10 1FF

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant, the freehold owner and landlord of a retail unit at County Mall, Crawley, sought deletion of the property from the rating list on the basis that it was undergoing strip-out works following the previous tenant's liquidation and was incapable of beneficial occupation. The tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the works constituted soft stripping (removal of the previous tenant's fittings) rather than stripping to shell condition, and that the property remained capable of beneficial occupation as a hereditament. The wiring and plumbing remained in place for a new tenant to utilize with their own fixtures and fittings, and the one-month work schedule represented disrepair that a reasonable landlord would be expected to undertake.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Arora Crawley Retail Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

• State of repair or deletion · decisive

Evidence

Photographs, Expert report

Cases cited

Newbigin v Monk [2017] UKSC 14; Jackson (VO) v Canary Wharf Ltd [2019] RA 411; Porter (VO) v Gladman Sipps [2011] UKUT 2004 (LC); Aviva Investors v Bunyan (VO); The Restaurant Group v Lucy Formela-Osborne (VO); Colour Weddings Limited v Ritchie Roberts (VO) [2019] UKUT 0385 (LC); Shoosmiths LLP and Mando Group Limited and Amanda Hitchings (VO)

Hearing

30 September 2024

Similar decisions

• Units 10 - 11 County Mall, RH10 1FF — Dismissed, 30 Oct 2024

All decisions in Crawley Borough Council · Shops nationally