Promoting and enhancing best practice and technical expertise

Rating: Law and Practice 2026

Applying Case Law to Practice

Best practice in rating cannot be achieved without understanding case law. This in person event enables leading lawyers and rating advisors, along with senior VOA contributors to come together to review key cases in the context of current practice. The event will be chaired by Upper Tribunal Member, Mark Higgin. Together they will review important and topical cases and explore the nuances of what is best and effective practice in the light of these decisions.

Start Date Venue Price  
17 March 2026 CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP, London £250 BOOK

Note: All prices are to be paid in GBP and are subject to VAT at the prevailing rate

Event duration: In Person Only. Afternoon Event (4 hours CPD).
Registration from: 12.45. Event starts at: 13.10. Event finishes at: 17.30.

Rating: Law and Practice is now an established and successful annual feature in the rating diary. It goes to the core of what rating is about: the impact of case law in rating work is profound and dictates how you practise. It is always valuable to hear about the cases, but the real value is in understanding the impact and significance of those cases on the way we work. This event provides commentary from the lawyers, from the VOA and private practice who have identified 5 core areas of rating practice. They will explore the extent and limits of how they impact on rating practice and the audience will be encouraged to join the unfolding debates.

The formula is a simple, they take a landmark case or an area of practice that is topical and/or contentious. The cases are then summarised by the speakers to enable a lively debate addressing the issues that will determine the rights and wrongs of assessments and valuations, pinpointing the questions that drive rateability and valuation.

Speakers Confirmed to Date

Programme

Welcome & Introduction from the Event Chair -  Mark Higgin


Valuation

A session considering cases where the approach to valuation evidence was a key issue, and reviewing the conclusions for valuers.


Owen v Bunyan (Valuation Officer) [2025] UKUT 42 (LC)

  • Effect of adverse topography, rights of way, and appurtenant use

Hitchings (VO) v Shoosmiths LLP & Mando Group Ltd [2025] UKUT 224 (LC)

  • How to assess value added by tenant’s fit-out when comparable evidence is weak

Moore (VO) (Appellant) and Hitchings (VO) (Appellant) [2025] UKUT 6 (LC)

  • Valuation of digital advertising rights on bus shelters

Robert Dyas Holdings Limited and Jo Moore (VO) [2025] UKUT 163 (LC)

  • A distribution warehouse in Hemel Hempstead. Rent on the subject property -v- tone

Waters v Cox (Valuation Officer) [2024] UKUT 232 (LC) 

  • The effect of reserved rights (developer rights over part of land) on value

Monk (VO) v Newbigin (VO) - [2017] UKSC 14

Practically Challenging? Or a Beacon of Light in the Fog?


  • Is Monk problematic?

Is Monk good law?

  • What has been happening post Monk? 
    • Impact on challenges and appeals
  • Healing the wound
    • Legislative fix?
    • Judicial retreat?
    • Or managed inconsistency forever? 

Unit of Assessment

What on the face of things, is an easy definition, but it creates perennial challenges.  The application of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Mazars and in Cardtronics may have been landmark decisions but the continuance of similar cases simply confirms it’s a ripe area for challenge.


Recent Cases:

  • Stanuszek v Bunyan [2025] EWHC 255
  • Bunyan v Fridays [2025] EWCA Civ 666
  • Moore v Bailey [2024] UKUT 304
  • Prosser v Rickets [2024] UKUT 264)
  • A discussion how these principles might apply to the new battleground of serviced offices and co-working spaces.


Network Rail Infrastructure Limited v Karl List [2026] EWCA Civ 7


  • The Court of Appeal upheld the Upper Tribunal’s decision that advertising rights at Victoria and Liverpool Street stations are capable of being shown as separate hereditaments on the business rates (NDR) list. Done deal?
  • It is the first time the courts have touched advertising hereditaments for circa 30 years, so what does the decision tell us? 
  • How does it progress the rules on hereditaments more generally?

GPCR and Early Engagement Already Resolve Rating Disputes - Why Not Add Mediation to the Toolkit? 

What lessons can be learned from HMRC’s Alternative Dispute Resolution service to settle tax disputes?


The MoJ, the Court rules and the Judges are coming close to demanding that the parties to disputes actively consider mediation before the disputes come close to trial. Obdurate refusal is being penalised with procedural sanctions and adverse order for costs. Why is mediation never considered in rating disputes? 


  • Can bodies performing a statutory duty mediate or is that abdicating their responsibilities?
  • Is mediation just negotiation with an umpire or something completely different?
  • What type of disputes might be suitable for mediation?
  • Statutory duty to maintain the tone of the list – would negotiation undermine the tone?  
  • Does the VO have the benefit of a margin of error before the Tribunal can interfere and where does that leave the mediator?
  • Might programming and bulk class negotiations replace the need for mediation?
  • Mediators are not yet engaged to settle rating disputes. Should they; could they be?
  • What lessons are to be learned from existing procedures whether GPCR, early engagement or the HMRC alternative dispute resolution scheme?