Tribunals · City of London Corporation · 2017 rating list

BST 4 KINGS BENCH WALK, TEMPLE, EC4Y 7DL

Office and Premises Decided 17 July 2025 CHG101090279 JMA Chartered Surveyors

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£38,250£400/m²
Ratepayer sought—
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£38,250£380/m²

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 16 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellants challenged the rateable values of 16 barristers' chambers in Victorian and Georgian buildings in Temple, London, seeking reductions based on lower unadjusted base rates. The tribunal dismissed the appeal on floor area measurement for one property and on fragmentation allowances, but allowed the appeals in part on the main issue: the tribunal found the original base rates of £400 psm (Victorian) and £380 psm (Georgian) were unreasonable, accepting rental evidence that demonstrated a 5-10% differential between post-war and Victorian/Georgian properties, and thus reduced the base rates to £380 psm and £360 psm respectively.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was One Essex Court Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone) · decisive
  • Floor area or measurement
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments, Photographs, Expert report
Cases cited
Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
Hearing
18 June 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in City of London Corporation · 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 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.