Beau Property, Third Floor Suite A, SL7 1YL
Office and premises Decided 31 March 2026 CHG101319774 Colliers International - Erich Andreas Gutt
Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant sought deletion of an office suite from the 2023 rating list, arguing that extensive strip-out works removing suspended ceilings, integral lighting and raised access flooring as part of a wider refurbishment scheme had rendered it incapable of beneficial occupation. The tribunal found that the works were not ordinary repair but radical alteration removing essential components necessary for office use, and that at the material day (3 November 2023) the property lacked the physical attributes to constitute a rateable hereditament. The statutory repair assumption did not apply as the logically prior question was whether the property was capable of beneficial occupation at all.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Beau Property (Marlow) Ltd, represented.
Grounds argued
- State of repair or deletion
- Evidence
- Photographs, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Porter v Trustees of Gladman Sipps; Thomas & Davies v Denly; Newbigin v Monk; Jackson v Canary Wharf; Aviva Investors v Bunyan; BNPPDS(J) Limited and BCI Limited v Hitchings
- Hearing
- 2 March 2026
Similar decisions
- Europa House, Chiltern Park, Chiltern Hill, Chalfont St Peter, Chalfont St Peter, SL9 9FG — Dismissed, 14 May 2026
- CRAYON HOUSE, MERCURY PARK,, WYCOMBE LANE, WOOBURN GREEN,, HP10 0HH — Allowed in part, 2 Sept 2025
All decisions in Buckinghamshire Council · 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.