Monday, August 04, 2008

Religious order sues state in dispute over rates valuation

The company that runs St Vincent’s Hospital in Dublin has taken a High Court action against the state’s property valuation agency amid a dispute over commercial rates.

St Vincent’s Healthcare Group, which is owned by the Sisters of Charity, has taken the judicial review application against the Commissioner for Valuation in an effort to overturn a recent hike in rates.

The healthcare group administers both St Vincent’s Hospital and St Michael’s Hospital in Dun Laoghaire, but it is understood that the case relates solely to St Vincent’s.

The Valuation Office is conducting a revaluation of all commercial and industrial property throughout the country for rating purposes.

This process began in late 2005 in the local authority area of South Dublin County Council and is now continuing on a phased basis across other local authority areas.

Sources said the revaluation process was expected to lead to other legal challenges to commercial rate hikes. A number of businesses and property owners have already appealed against revaluations.

There is a three-tier appeal system to rate increases. First, a decision by the Valuation Office can be appealed to the in-house Commissioner of Valuation.

Following that, an appeal can be lodged with the Valuation Tribunal and then a further appeal can go to the High Court and the Supreme Court.

According to its most recent accounts, St Vincent’s Healthcare Group had a turnover of €307 million in 2006 and recorded an operating surplus of €2 million.

The matter has been mentioned in the High Court and is due to be heard in full later this year.

A spokeswoman for St Vincent’s Healthcare Group said the hospital was not in a position to comment as the matter was before the courts.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer

No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.

The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.

Sotto Voce