Navigating and Resolving Rating Disputes in the Valuation and Upper Tribunals
This is a comprehensive review of the procedures, skills and expectations for those that take rating disputes to the Valuation or Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). Understanding the tribunal procedures, adhering to the duties and expectations of an expert, and the impact of Gardiner Theobald LLP v. Jackson (VO) 2018 are key reasons to attend.
|16 October 2019||Mills & Reeve, London|
Note: All prices are to be paid in GBP and are subject to VAT at the prevailing rate
CPT Events would like to thank Mills & Reeve for the use of their facilities.
Please note: Mills & Reeve are relocating in early October to: 24 King William Street, London, EC4R 9AT
Rating surveyors are at home advising clients and managing appeals. But when they step into the Tribunal they are in an unfamiliar and potentially hostile environment; the home of lawyers and judges, where the rules ofengagement and expectations are very different. At the very least, the unfamiliarity can put experts at a disadvantage, at worst, terror.
And Gardiner Theobald LLP v. Jackson (VO) 2018 decision has
created a new dynamic which requires those bringing cases to look at their
systems prior to the hearing.
Tribunals simply follow the evidence and if your evidence and actions
are not clear and unambiguous, or if you do not adhere to the expectations of
presenting evidence, or fail to follow procedures, then your case and your
client can suffer. And potentially so will you!
This programme reviews the skills, procedures and tactics for taking 2010 rating Appeals to the Valuation and Upper Tribunal. There remains a high volume of outstanding appeals from the 2010 List, with about 90,000 still unsettled. As many of these are the more contentious cases and significant number could end up being heard before the Valuation Tribunal and some may be expected to reach the Upper Tribunal.
The 2017 Rating list has 1.9 million properties, and only 7% have been claimed by advisors, so whilst the numbers in the CCA process are very small, once the inertia of the system has been addressed, there are likely to be significant volumes coming in the next 12 months.
This is a must attend event if you are destined to give or take evidence to either Tribunal.
- Judge Elizabeth Cooke, Judge of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)
- Dan Kolinsky QC, Barrister, Landmark Chambers
- Richard New BA (Hons), Partner, Mills & Reeve LLP
- Blake Penfold BSc FRICS MCIArb, Business Rates Consultant, Blake Penfold Consultancy
- Roger Messenger BSc FRICS FIRRV REV MCIArb Hon. CAAV MIPAV (HONS) RICS Registered Valuer, Senior Partner, Wilks Head & Eve
Welcome & Introduction by Conference Chairman - Upper Tribunal Judge Cooke
Whether to Appeal to the VTE
Appealing in the 2010 list:
- VTE Standard Directions and Gardiner & Theobald v Jackson [VO] (2018)
Appealing in the 2017 list:
- Right of appeal to the VTE
- What evidence is allowed?
- Significance of the decision notice
- Making an appeal
Are there other routes available dependent on the nature of the dispute?
Whether to appeal to UT
The Decisions and Fall Out from the VT - The Transition to UT:
- Time limits to lodge an appeal to the UT
- Reviewing the statements of case and evaluation the decision from VT
- Can you alter your statement of case?
- Estimating costs
- Assessing the chances of success
- Changes to costs in the UT regime
- How to settle at any stage
- Inheriting a case, or being parachuted into a disputed case
- Bringing forward a class action or lead case
- Direct access - pros and cons
- Using costs as a way to reach settlement: Calderbanks and sealed offers
Procedures to get to a hearing
- Statements of case
- Witness statements
- Applying for postponements
- Avoiding strikeouts
- Admission of evidences
- Appeal requirements
- Admissibility of evidence
- Standard and simplified procedures
- Complex case procedures
- Statement of case
- Your change in role
- Preparation and service of statements and reports
- Statement of agreed facts and issues
- Bundles and skeletons
- Sanctions for failure to comply
Preparing Your Statement of Case
- Preparing your case, your documents
- What your statement of case must contain
- Hammerson UK Properties v Gowlett [VO] (2017)
- Facts on which you wish to rely
- Variations in the statement of case between the VT and UT
- The sources of expectation and best practice: Tribunal procedures and RICS Expert Witness Practice Statements, Case Law
- Liabilities of expert witnesses and professional indemnity issues
- Changes to the rules of privilege
- Changes to practice directions
- Where an expert acts in a dual capacity as advocate and expert: Can you still do both? The impact of Gardiner Theobald LLP v. Jackson [VO] (2018)
- The obligation to disclose all relevant information - a duty of candour: how much information?
Effective Team Work
- When and how to instruct your solicitor and advocate
- How to choose
- How the advocate, solicitor and surveyor need to work together
At the Hearing: Giving Evidence
The natural ground and home for litigation lawyers and judge; but an alien environment for experts and most witnesses
- Who's who: what do they do?
- Timeline and order
The Tribunal Perspective:
- What is the tribunal seeking?
- How the tribunal weights evidence
- Credibility and building trust
Presenting your Case:
Behaviours from Advocates - know your sparring partner and their behaviours
- How do advocates examine?
- Know your own advocate and your opponent's
- The logic of the advocate
- Styles of cross-examination
- Cross examination strategies and tactics
- Practical examples
Behaviours from Witnesses:
- Presenting yourself to the tribunal
- How to present yourself
- Oral evidence - do's and don'ts
- Duties in cross examination imposed on the advocate
- What they should, can and can't do?
- Styles of giving evidence; style of being cross examined
- Practical examples
- Reliance of notes and reports
- Useful tips
- Dealing with interventions and questions from the Tribunal members
- Decision language
- Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory - the nightmare of costs; you may win the case, but lose on costs