THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, WA15 0TP
Warehouse, office and premises Decided 9 January 2026 CHG101138894 CBRE
Figures are as stated in the decision, and are values in the 2017 list; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This judgement decided 5 properties together; the figures above are for this appeal's property (THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, MANCHESTER WA15 0TP). Every property is listed below.
The 5 properties in this decision
One judgement covered all of these appeals. Each property’s figures as the judgement states them (2017 list); this appeal’s property is highlighted.
| Property | Original RV | Sought | Tribunal decided | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, MANCHESTER WA15 0TPThis appeal | £1,080,000 | — | £1,080,000 | Dismissed |
| THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, MANCHESTER WA15 0TP | £1,830,834 | — | £1,920,000 | Allowed in part |
| THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, MANCHESTER WA15 0TP | £2,992,244 | — | £2,920,000 | Allowed in part |
| THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, MANCHESTER WA15 0TP | £3,000,000 | — | — | Dismissed |
| THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, MANCHESTER WA15 0TP | £4,467,645 | — | £4,370,000 | Allowed in part |
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant sought an allowance of 7.5% to 10% for a split site hereditament comprising warehouse, office and studio units, arguing additional costs for equipment, staffing and security. The tribunal found the site was not split as severely as comparable cases and granted a 2.5% allowance for split-site disadvantages, effective from when the assessment included more than just two warehouses. Appeals 1 and 4 were dismissed (appeal 4 was superseded); appeals 2, 3 and 5 were allowed in part.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was The Hut.com Limited and The Hut Group, represented.
Grounds argued
- Quantum or end allowance · decisive
- Evidence
- Expert report, Photographs, Settled assessments, Earlier tribunal decisions
- Cases cited
- FC Brown Steel Equipment Ltd v Karl Hopkins (VO) [2022] UKUT 51 (LC); Lassic Limited v J Moore (VO); Molecular Products Limited v Valuation Officer; Domino's Pizza Group Ltd v Andrew Mouland (VO); The Hut.com Limited v Hitchings; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson (VO) [2018] UKUT 0253 (LC)
- Hearing
- 10 December 2025
Similar decisions
- THE HUT GROUP, ICON, SUNBANK LANE, WA15 0TP — Allowed in part, 9 Jan 2026
- The Hut Group Icon, Manchester, Sunbank Lane, WA15 0TP — Allowed in part, 9 Jan 2026
- The Hut Group Icon, Manchester, Sunbank Lane, WA15 0TP — Allowed in part, 9 Jan 2026
- The Hut Group, Icon, Sunbank Lane, WA15 0TP — Dismissed, 9 Jan 2026
All decisions in Manchester City Council · Industrial and warehouses 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.