Partial occupation of premises. Value of par ticular years. Fifthly. Where premises are only occupied for a portion of a year, if the peculiar nature of the premises prescribe such limited occupation, still they are to be estimated at an annual value, with reference to such limited occupation. A familiar example is a theatre where the occupation is only during a season, but the rate is to be imposed during the whole of the year. Lodging-houses at watering-places are only occupied during the season; nevertheless they are valued at an average of the whole year's profit. A practical difficulty sometimes arises in respect of premises capable of distinct occupations, of which portions are from time to time unoccupied. Usually there is one principal occupier of the entire premises who underlets the portions. In strictness he is only liable in respect of so much as is actually occupied at the time of the rate. Where the rate is laid upon the whole in a certain sum, if the value of the unoccupied part be included, the occupier's only remedy is by appeal. If the rate be laid separately upon the distinct parts of the premises, the rate for the unoccupied part is in itself simply void. Instances of this occur in the factories in the manufacturing districts, and in chambers and certain large lodging tenements in the metropolis. The local Acts which exist in many parishes, and the general statute 13 & 14 Vict. c. 99, by which the owners of small tenements are assessable in the place of the occupiers, enable the parish authorities to deal with these peculiar cases by composition with the owners. Indeed, it should be remarked, that it is not a correct principle to estimate land upon its actual value in any particular year, when the profit may from some peculiarity or accident be increased or diminished. But its value should be ascertained by reference to a series of years when the occupation takes place under the ordinary circumstances applicable to the particular species of property. The valuation is made with a present and prospective reference, so that the inquiry is what rent would the tenant then give. He would calculate upon the then state of things, and could not be influenced by circumstances which might occur pending his occupancy, but could not be foreseen. A farmer is not allowed to escape the rate because some of his fields lie fallow. At the same time it must be remembered that the value is to be taken at the time of the assessment, and not with reference to some previous rate. Q. v. The London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company, 4 N. S. C. 511; 15 Q. B. 313. profitable or Sixthly. It is not necessary to consider whether Occupation the occupation of the premises be profitable to the otherwise. occupant or not. A farmer or a trader must pay the rate upon the land or the shop, although the farm or the shop may be occupied at a loss. So a mine may be worked at a loss to the miner, yet a profit may result to the owner of the mine. There must be an occupation beneficial in its nature, that is, the occupation of a subject matter, producing a valuable return, though not necessarily valuable in any given year to the occupier on a balance sheet of profit and loss. Q. v. Taunton Market Trustees, 1 N. S. C. 557. ments to be The premises, as already noticed, are to be valued Improvewholly without reference to the actual rent paid, and valued. consequently all improvements and additions made But goodwill or profits to be taken into the es timate. to them are to be taken into account, if the value be higher, although the amount of the rent is not increased. Seventhly. Care, however, must be taken to avoid of trade not introducing goodwill or the power of influencing customers, or the profits of trade, in the estimate of the value of the property. The former is of too vague and personal a character to be the subject of estimate; and the latter result from the capital expended in trade, not from the premises themselves, although, as the amount of the profits may be affected by the peculiar position of the premises, the capacity of producing such profits is properly estimated in the calculation of the value of the particular premises. Furniture and move when to be estimated and when not. So also the value of furniture or moveable fixtures able fixtures is not to be estimated in the value of the premises, unless that value be increased by the peculiar nature of that furniture; thus, a dwelling-house furnished with the ordinary furniture of such houses, is not to be valued with reference to that furniture: but a factory fitted up with machines, a foundry having its furnaces and forges attached, a shop having counters and shelves, a billiard-room having billiard tables fixed in it, should be estimated at a higher value than similar premises where those appendages are wanting, because they are the proper fittings of the premises, without which the occupation would be comparatively of little value. Fixed machinery. Equally clear is the rule that where fixed machinery, such as steam-engines, vats, presses, salt-pans, cranes, gasometers, and the like, is combined with the real property, and, though capable of severance, profits not Eighthly. Again, extrinsic profits, not themselves Extrinsic rateable cannot be estimated in the valuation of pro- appurtenant. perty to which such profits are not appurtenant; thus, light-house tolls, being for the most part privileges, and not compensation paid for the use of the lighthouse or the land on which it stands, are not rateable, and consequently cannot be valued in the estimate of the light-house. R. v. Tynemouth, 12 East, 46. And tolls for the use of a ferry across a navigable river cannot be taken into consideration in estimating the value of the landing place, though the landing place is to be valued with a consideration of its being available for the earning the tolls. Q. v. N. & S. Shields Ferry Company, 22 L. J. R. (N. S.) M. C.9; 1 E. & B. 140. Market tolls not being paid for the use or occupation of any land, but for the simple licence of selling goods in a market, are not rateable. Roberts v. The Churchwardens and Overseers of Aylesbury, 1 Ell. & B. 423. Also, quayage tolls paid to a corporation by the masters of vessels landing goods at a port in which the corporation, as well as other persons, owned quays, and the tolls were paid indiscriminately in respect of the landing at all, were held to be exempt. R. v. Lewis, 26 Lan Times, 58; 19 Jur. 1108. A right of common in gross, which is held as a personal right and is not appurtenant to any land, is not rateable. Q. v. The Corporation of Alnwick, 9 A. & E. 444. So, also, mere manorial rights, such as the right to appoint gamekeepers, or other officers, to hold courts, or to receive heriots, are not subject to the rate. Quit rents, indeed, are included in the value of the land to the occupier. And thus a railway was held to be not assessable in respect of a guaranteed dividend payable by the directors of another railway company, the guarantee being independent of the user or occupation of the railway. Newmarket Railway Company v. St. Andrew the Less, Cambridge, 23 L. J. R., M. C. 76; 3 E. & B. 94. |