ASSESSMENT COURT

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2325, 5 December 1914, Page 8

ASSESSMENT COURT

MUNICIPAL IVALUES QUESTIONED, _ In the Magistrate's Court yesterday a sitting of the Assessment Court wae held, before Mr. W.. G. Riddell, S.JI. (chairman), and Messrs. H. E. Leighton and T. Dwan, Assessors. D. B. Howden, for whom Mri A. Blair appearedi appealed against the valuation of his property at the corn,er of Wakefield Street and Farish Street. Mr. Blair pointed out that the argument in Mr. Howden'e case arose in a number, of other cases, and he suggested that tho Court should hear himself and Mr. T. Neave, in respect of the principle for which they contended.

Mr. M. Myers, for the Department, acquiesced, and Mr. Blair proceeded, ana said that tho objection was to the unimproved value, and in. some cases the Court was asked to increase the value of improvements. It was tho same in every case; the Court sustained the; '"alue of improvements, and fixed the unimproved values. The objectors then took advantage of Section .31 of . the Act, and required the Valuer-General to reduce the capital value and the unimproved value in accordance with his original objection,, or-that the Government should take the land. The Department tookup tho extraordinary stand that it would take tlie valuo off tie improvements, but would not take it off the unimproved value. • Mr. Neavo put the same argument forward on behalf of the WeUingum Gas Company, which objected to the adjustment of the valuation consequent upon an application, under Section 31 of the Act, for the Department either to reduce the valuations or acquire the land. ' .- ■ . . Mr. T. W. Hislop appeared to object to the valuation of the property of the' Stewart Timber, Glass, and Hardware Co. . ' . . Replying on behalf of the Department Mr. Myers said that all that was contended was that the proportional system it had adopted was pnma facia the right system. . Mr. Blair contended that if was the Department which was going against its own valuation for its own purpose. ■Mr. Myers suggested that if the Court had heard argument it should adjourn, and give its decision in a public way, so that evidence might be called. Mr. Neave said that the Valuation Department could nbt assess the value of the improvement-of land _by a rule of thumb, and the question in dispute was only as regarded the unimproved value of the land which was challenged in the Assessment Court. .

Mr. Riddell said that the Court would reserve decision, but he considered that a declaratory judgment of the Supreme Court would be preferable.' The Court would give a decision at an early date.