The Town Library

Rating Decisions

Our regular update on Rating cases provides a short summary and full transcript of key rating decisions. These cases are chosen for their impact on rating law and practice.

Recent Developments – Edition #33

This is the latest update of the Rating Wing of the Town Library, an online resource providing a short summary and full transcript of key rating decisions.

To forward this email onto a friend or colleague click here, to see our complete archive of Rating case summaries click here and to subscribe to other services of the Town Library click here.



Case Name: Cardtronics UK Ltd and others v Sykes and others (VOs) [2020] UKSC 21 (20 May 2020)


Case Name: Libra Textiles Ltd and Centric Assets Ltd v Ritchie Roberts and David Alford (VOs) [2020] UKUT 0237 (LC) (31 July 2020)

Topic: (1) An application of the Cardtronics Supreme Court decision and (2) the validity of appeals to retrospectively amend the 2010 list, in reliance on the Rating (Property in Common Occupation) etc Act 2018 and associated regulations, allowing relevant merger proposals which had previously been ruled out by the Mazars Supreme Court decision.

Full Case: Click Here

Summary: These conjoined appeals (relating to premises in Colne and Portsmouth respectively) against VTE decisions turned on the ability under the Rating (Property in Common Occupation) etc Act 2018 (the “2018 PICO Act”) and associated regulations to retrospectively amend the 2010 list, which had closed on 31 March 2017.  The proposals had sought to merge the respective hereditaments on the grounds that they were contiguous and interconnected.  It was argued by the ratepayers that these proposals fell within the provisions of the 2018 PICO Act and regulations, which enabled late proposals to the 2010 list.  Having disposed of an occupation issue in respect of the Colne premises, which was decided in favour of the ratepayer by application of the  Cardtronics Supreme Court decision, the Tribunal rejected the appeals on the basis that the 2018 PICO Act (and regulations) related only to premises which were contiguous but not interconnected.  In short, the proposals did not meet the criteria for validity.

Commentary: Click Here

Download this report

< back to News & Resources

Copyright © 2020 Town Legal LLP and licensors. All rights reserved.

Subscribe to our mailing list for weekly updates

Marketing Permissions
Town Legal will use the information you provide on this form to send you the Town Library update and to provide you with information and updates from Town Legal LLP. Please let us know all the ways you would like to hear from us:

You can change your mind at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in the footer of any email you receive from us, or by contacting us at We will treat your information with respect. For more information about our privacy practices please review our Privacy Policy available by clicking the ‘Our Privacy Policy’ button below. This is also available here. By clicking ‘Subscribe to list’ below, you agree that we may process your information in accordance with these terms.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp’s privacy practices here.


This site uses cookies to keep our site secure and provide our users with the best possible experience. For more information, click here.

I Decline I Accept