Tribunals · Cannock Chase District Council · 2023 rating list

Unit 25 Cannock Shopping Centre, Market Hall Street, WS11 1EB

Shop and premises Decided 7 April 2026 CHG101310315 CBRE - Mark Hayes

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV—£325/m²
Ratepayer sought—
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided—£325/m²

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 11 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant sought reductions to various units at Cannock Shopping Centre, arguing for tone of value at £150 per m2 for some units and £1 per m2 for others, based on challenging rental evidence. The tribunal found the evidence unreliable, noting many lettings were either significantly pre or post-dating the AVD, contained performance-related elements, or high service charges distorting the rating hypothesis. The tribunal accepted the VO's approach using a comparable at £317.91 per m2 and applied a tone of £325 (for superior units) toned back for location, finding no compelling evidence to support the reductions sought and dismissing the appeals.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was SISU CANNOCK LIMITED, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Rental evidence
Evidence
Rents
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Telereal Trillium v Hewitt; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
Hearing
9 March 2026

Similar decisions

All decisions in Cannock Chase District Council · Shops 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.