The High Court has upheld a Valuation Tribunal decision excluding four vacant office blocks at Bank Centre in Ballsbridge from Dublin City Council’s valuation list, while retaining the associated car park at a valuation of €162,500.
In a judgment delivered on 17 January 2020, Ms Justice Hyland answered four questions of law in favour of the Commissioner of Valuation’s appeal opponent, Fibonacci Property ICAV, and affirmed the Tribunal’s 7 November 2018 determination. The High Court’s role was to decide questions of law in the case stated; it found no legal error in the Tribunal’s decision.
The dispute concerned blocks A, B, C and D, which had been vacant since the end of 2014. After the former occupier, AIB, left, it disconnected services. The judgment records that the buildings had no lighting or power, water, foul drainage or fire alarm system, apart from a 28-amp electricity supply maintained for live systems. No agreement was reached with AIB on connecting to its foul drainage, water supply and fire hydrant services.
The Tribunal had accepted evidence that reconnecting and recommissioning services would cost about €12 million and take around 18 months. It concluded that no hypothetical tenant would rent the property at the certified annual value of €1.871 million while facing those costs and delay. The Commissioner argued that the Tribunal should have considered AIB as a possible tenant and a longer-term letting, and should have assumed the buildings were in reasonable repair.
Justice Hyland rejected those grounds. The Commissioner had not presented evidence that AIB intended to return or could reconnect the services without the stated obstacles. The court also found no basis to require the Tribunal to assume a fixed long lease, or to treat the buildings as ready for occupation despite their actual condition. Under section 48(3) of the Valuation Act 2001, the annual value was to reflect the property’s actual state.
The Commissioner also argued that the Tribunal should have considered a lower valuation or alternative uses. The court rejected that submission: no alternative valuation or supporting evidence had been put before the Tribunal. It was not required to devise an unspecified alternative figure or use.
The High Court affirmed the Tribunal’s determination: the four office blocks were excluded as incapable of beneficial occupation, and the car park was included in the valuation list at €162,500.