28, GOLDHAWK ROAD, W12 8DH
Shop and premises Decided 9 July 2026 CHG101311412 Ryan Property Tax Services UK Limited
Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 5 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant challenged the £660 per m2 tone adopted in the 2023 list, seeking reduction to £540 per m2 based on recent rental transactions closest to the antecedent valuation date (28A & 28B Goldhawk Road and 41-43a Goldhawk Road). The tribunal found the original tone of £660 per m2 was unreasonable but the proposed £540 per m2 was too low, noting that evidence from 3 Goldhawk Road (£765.16 per m2) indicated the sought reduction was excessive. The tribunal concluded £590 per m2 was reasonable, allowing the appeals in part.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was AL-ANAKA LTD, represented.
Grounds argued
- Comparable assessments (tone) · decisive
- Evidence
- Rents, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
- Hearing
- 12 June 2026
Similar decisions
- 20, GOLDHAWK ROAD, W12 8DH — Allowed in part, 9 Jul 2026
- 28 A & 28B, GOLDHAWK ROAD, W12 8DH — Allowed in part, 9 Jul 2026
- 32, GOLDHAWK ROAD, W12 8DH — Allowed in part, 9 Jul 2026
- 26 A, GOLDHAWK ROAD, W12 8DH — Allowed in part, 9 Jul 2026
All decisions in London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham · 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 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.