Supreme Court hears £500m case on cash machines and business rates

In Cardtronics Europe Ltd & Others v Chris Sykes & Others (Valuation Officers) [2018] EWCA Civ 2472 the Court of Appeal ruled that ATMs inside and outside of stores should not be assessed for additional business rates.

The issue before the Supreme Court is: Who is the rateable occupier of the site of a cash machine whose operator is a different company from the occupier of the premises in which it is located?

Related Articles

School wins village green challenge as High Court orders deletion of land from register

Law Commission provisionally backs retention of “contracting-out” model for security of tenure for business tenancies

Upper Tribunal rejects claim restrictive covenants in favour of council was obsolete

Land Registry to publish data on “avoidable requisitions” following land registration applications

North West council secures extension to ‘persons unknown’ injunction prohibiting unauthorised encampments

The background to this is that cash machines in supermarkets are often operated by a separate bank rather than by the supermarket.

The Valuation Officers have listed the sites as separate hereditaments in the rateable occupation of the banks.

It has been estimated that £500m is at stake in the dispute.

The respondents in the case are Cardtronics UK; Tesco Stores; Tesco Personal Finance; Sainsbury's Supermarkets; Sainsbury's Bank; and Co-operative Group.

The case is being heard by a Supreme Court panel comprising Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lord Carnwath, Lady Black and Lord Kitchin.