Pall Mall Investments (London) Ltd v Gloucester City Council

Rates – Rateable occupation. The district judge upheld the respondent local authority's unoccupied non-domestic rate demand against the appellant company and rejected the appellant's argument that the properties were exempt on the ground that non-occupation was the result of dilapidations and the state of the properties was such that occupation was prohibited by law. The appellant appealed by way of case stated. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that health and safety legislation did not prohibit occupation and the risk of breach of the legislation if the premises had been, without more, occupied did not suffice to exempt the appellant.