Judgment: 2025-03-21 · Court archive

High Court upholds rates exemption for disability care homes in Tipperary and Meath

High Court · [2025] IEHC 197

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Redwood Extended Care Facility (Appellant)
  • Commissioner for Valuation (Respondent)
What

High Court upholds rates exemption for disability care homes in Tipperary and Meath

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Kiltinan
  • Fethard
  • Clonmel
  • Stamullen
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Valuation Tribunal had found that 100% of Millview’s income came from the HSE and Tusla, while 97.8% of Nua’s overall revenue came from those bodies. Redwood likewise received all funding for the relevant care activity from the HSE under service arrangements.

The High Court has upheld a rates exemption for two residential disability care facilities in County Tipperary and County Meath, confirming that their valuations should remain at zero.

The cases concerned Millview, a five-bedroom dormer bungalow at Kiltinan between Fethard and Clonmel, operated by Nua Healthcare, and a six-bedroom property outside Stamullen operated by Redwood Extended Care Facility.

Millview provides 24-hour care for four children aged between 12 and 18 with intellectual and/or physical disabilities. The Redwood property accommodates five adults with intellectual disabilities.

The central legal question was whether the properties fell within paragraph 14(b) of Schedule 4 of the Valuation Act 2001. That provision exempts property used to care for elderly or disabled people where the operator’s expenses in carrying out that activity are defrayed wholly or mainly out of money provided by the Exchequer, apart from funding under the Nursing Homes Support Scheme.

The Valuation Tribunal had found that 100% of Millview’s income came from the HSE and Tusla, while 97.8% of Nua’s overall revenue came from those bodies. Redwood likewise received all funding for the relevant care activity from the HSE under service arrangements.

The Commissioner for Valuation argued that those payments were income for services rather than the Exchequer defraying the operators’ expenses.

Mr Justice Bradley rejected that interpretation. He held that the statutory words “out of moneys provided” had to be given effect. Nua and Redwood received Exchequer-funded payments and used those monies to meet the costs of running their care services.

The judge also distinguished an earlier ruling involving Glendale Nursing Home. That case concerned the Fair Deal scheme, where State support was directed towards an individual resident’s care costs. By contrast, Nua and Redwood had contracts directly with the HSE as service providers, with no equivalent individual funding arrangement.

The court therefore found no error in the Tribunal’s decisions and upheld the nil valuations. Costs and consequential matters were left for a later hearing.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review