Hitachi Rail Europe Ltd, Hitachi Rail Europe Ltd, EC4M 7AW
Offices and premises Decided 20 July 2026 CHG101243804 Colliers / Graham + Sibbald
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 8 properties together; the figures above are for this appeal's property (5th Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW). Every property is listed below.
The 8 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st and 2nd Flrs, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £2,230,000 | — | £2,230,000 | Dismissed |
| 1st & (Exc North) Pt 2nd Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £2,070,000 | — | £2,070,000 | Dismissed |
| Pt 6th Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £407,500 | — | £407,500 | Dismissed |
| 9th Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £675,000 | — | £675,000 | Dismissed |
| 4th Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £1,130,000 | — | £1,130,000 | Dismissed |
| 3rd Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £1,130,000 | — | £1,130,000 | Dismissed |
| 5th Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AWThis appeal | £337,500 | — | £337,500 | Dismissed |
| 7th Flr, 60 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7AW | £645,000 | — | £645,000 | Dismissed |
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellants, represented by Montagu Evans and others, argued that the price per m² of £550 was too high and should be reduced to £535 based on rental evidence from within 60 Ludgate Hill and comparable office assessments. The tribunal found that the rental evidence from within the building (ranging from £504 to £650 per m²) did not support a reduction, with two rents analysed below and two analysed above the adopted price of £550 per m². The tribunal therefore confirmed the original rateable values were not unreasonable.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Commonwealth Bank of Australia, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Rents, Settled assessments, Earlier tribunal decisions
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell
- Hearing
- 26 June 2026
Similar decisions
- LUTRON (INC 101-106 FENCHURCH STREET), PT 4TH F 52-54, LEADENHALL STREET, EC3A 2BJ — Allowed in part, 25 Sept 2026
- 5 TH FLR 1, BARTHOLOMEW LANE, EC2N 2AX — Dismissed, 10 Sept 2026
- Petronas Energy Trading Ltd, Petronas Energy Trading Ltd, EC4M 7AW — Dismissed, 20 Jul 2026
- Equistone Partners Europe Limited, PT 6TH FLR 60 Ludgate Hill, EC4M 7AW — Dismissed, 20 Jul 2026
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 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.