C. A. 1912 Feb. 23. [IN THE COURT OF APPEAL.] METROPOLITAN ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS, LIMITED v. Rates General District Rate-Assessment-Tramway-" Land used only as a A company were the owners and occupiers of, and worked as one connected system, a tramway and a light railway, which were constructed in and along certain public streets and roads in the district of an urban council. The tramway and the light railway were constructed and worked under and subject to the provisions of certain local Acts and Orders; they had a junction with each other and were worked by electricity on the overhead system. They were identical as to mode of construction and materials used, and the rails of each were laid with their uppermost surface level with the surface of the highway; the same carriages were used upon them and ran through from the one on to the other, and the electrical energy used for working both the tramway and the light railway was generated at the same power station and thence transmitted over a common system of cables and mains to sub-stations: Held that the tramway was "land used only as a railway constructed under the powers of an Act of Parliament" within the meaning of s. 211, sub-s. 1 (b), of the Public Health Act, 1875, and that the company were therefore entitled in respect of their tramway to be assessed to the general district rate at one fourth only of its net annual value. Swansea Improvements and Tramway Co. v. Swansea Urban Sanitary Authority [1892] 1 Q. B. 357, overruled. APPEAL of the Metropolitan Electric Tramways, Limited, from the decision of a Divisional Court upon a case stated by justices. At the petty sessions holden at Tottenham a complaint had been preferred by the urban district council of the district of Tottenham against the appellants charging that the appellants, being a corporation duly rated and assessed to the general district rate in and by a rate made in April, 1910, in the sum of 495l. 12s. 6d., had not paid the same in full or otherwise than by payment of the sum of 123l. 18s. 2d. part thereof, and had refused and neglected to pay the sum of 371l. 148. 4d. residue thereof. Upon the hearing, the appellants were ordered to pay to the respondents the said sum of 3711. 148. 4d.; but the following case was stated for the opinion of the High Court. Upon the hearing of the complaint the following facts were admitted or proved :--- C. A. 1912 METRO ELECTRIC LIMITED v. 1. On April 1, 1910, the respondents made a general district rate under the Public Health Act, 1875, upon all property in POLITAN the district for the purpose of defraying the expenses incurred TRAMWAYS, by them in the execution of or by virtue of the Public Health Acts, and the appellants were thereby rated in respect of the TOTTENHAM tramway hereditaments hereinafter mentioned at the rateable. value of 45751., and the sum of 495l. 12s. 6d. was demanded as the amount of rate payable in respect of the said rateable value. 2. Subject to the question raised by this case, the said rate was duly made and demanded, and the appellants were therein rated in respect of their occupation of the lines of rails of the tramways within the district hereinafter mentioned. 3. The appellants paid to the respondents in respect of the said rate the sum of 123l. 18s. 2d., being the total sum charged by the said rate calculated on one fourth part only of the said. rateable value. 4. The appellants are the occupiers of and work as one connected system certain tramways and light railways constructed in and along certain public streets and roads, all of which are highways, in the counties of Middlesex, London, and Hertford. [Here followed a reference to the delineation of the tramways and light railways upon a plan which formed part of the case.] The appellants purchased the said tramways from the North Metropolitan Tramways Company and are the lessees of the said light railway under leases granted by the Middlesex County Council. 5. The said tramways and light railways were constructed and are worked under the powers and subject to the provisions of the following Acts and Orders, or some of them : As to the said tramways: The North London Suburban Tramways Order, 1879; the North London Tramways Act, 1882; the North Metropolitan Tramways Acts, 1892, 1897, and 1902; the Tottenham Improvement Act, 1904; the Metropolitan Electric Tramways Act, 1908.. As to the said light railways: The County of Middlesex Light 2 URBAN COUNCIL. C. A. 1912 METRO POLITAN ELECTRIC LIMITED Railways Orders, 1901 and 1903 (both made and confirmed under the Light Railways Act, 1896). 6. Certain portions of the said tramways and light railways constructed and worked under the Acts and Orders herein before TRAMWAYS, mentioned or some of them (hereinafter called respectively" the tramway" and " the light railway ") are situate within the district. The complaint was made in respect of the tramway and COUNCIL. not of the light railway. v. TOTTENHAM URBAN 7. The tramway and the light railway, in accordance with the provisions of the County of Middlesex Light Railway Order, 1901, have a junction with each other and also have junctions with other of the tramways and railways outside the district, and all of them are worked by the appellants as one connected system as aforesaid. 8. The tramway and the light railway as to mode of construction and the materials used therein are identical, and consist of lines of iron or steel grooved or slotted rails laid with the uppermost surface thereof level with the surface of the highway, and overhead wires suspended from posts placed alongside of or in the middle of the streets convey the electric power required for moving the carriages thereon. The carriages used upon the tramway and the light railway are the same carriages, and have flanged wheels running on the rails, and the same carriages used on the tramway run through and over the light railway for the conveyance of passengers and parcels thereon as part of one common system. The charges authorized by the Acts and Orders aforesaid, or some of them, are also applicable to both the tramway and light railway. The same carriages are moved along the rails both of the tramway and the light railway by electrical power on what is commonly called the overhead system as above mentioned. [Here came a statement as to photographs which accompanied and were made part of the case.] 9. The electrical energy used for working the tramway and the light railway as aforesaid is generated at the same power station and is thence transmitted over a common system of cables and mains to sub-stations. The tramway and the light railway both take the power required by them in common either from the said main station or sub-stations. C. A. 1912 METRO POLITAN 10. Pursuant to the powers of the said Metropolitan Electric Tramways Act, 1908, the appellants have appointed stages upon the tramway and the light railway or portions thereof as part of the whole system aforesaid and as one undertaking, and carry both. ELECTRIC passengers and parcels over fixed through routes, some of which TRAMWAYS, are partly upon the tramway and partly upon the light railway, at through fares and charges. LIMITED v. TOTTENHAM 11. The lines of rails and the land occupied thereby forming COUNCIL. the tramway, together with the overhead wires and the posts from which they are suspended, are the premises assessed in the said rate and are used only in the same manner as the light railway is used for public conveyance. 12. Prior to the year 1904 the appellants in respect of the tramway were assessed by the respondents to the general rate of the district as a railway is assessed under s. 211, sub-s. 1 (b), of the Public Health Act, 1875, namely, in the proportion of one fourth part only of the net annual value thereof. 13. The appellants, in respect of the lines of rails and the land occupied thereby forming the light railway, are assessed by the respondents to the general district rate of the district in the proportion of one fourth part only of the net annual value thereof, and no question was raised by either of the parties in relation thereto. 14. It was contended on behalf of the appellants that the premises forming the tramway so assessed were assessable in the said rate under the Public Health Act, 1875, s. 211, sub-s. 1 (b), at not more than one fourth part only of the net annual value, and that the appellants were in respect of the said premises entitled to the benefit of the said provision. For the respondents it was contended that the said premises were not so assessable, and that the appellants were not entitled to the said benefit, and they relied on the case of Swansea Improvements and Tramway Co. v. Swansea Urban Sanitary Authority (1) as supporting that view. 15. We are of opinion that the case is governed by the decision in the said Swansea Case (1), and that the tramway is not a railway within the meaning of s. 211, sub-s. 1 (b), of the Public (1) [1892] 1 Q. B. 357. C. A. Health Act, 1875, and we accordingly made an order for the payment by the appellants to the respondents of the said sum of 371l. 148. 4d. and the costs of the said complaint together with POLITAN ten guineas costs of the respondents. 1912 METRO ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS, v. TOTTENHAM URBAN COUNCIL. The question of law arising on the above statement for the opinion of the Court is: Whether upon the facts stated the appellants are entitled under the provisions of s. 211 of the Public Health Act, 1875, to be assessed in respect of the said tramway in the proportion of one fourth part only of the net annual value thereof. If the Court shall be of opinion that the said order was legally and properly made, the said order is to stand; but if the Court shall be of opinion to the contrary, then the said order is to be reversed. The Divisional Court (Lord Alverstone C.J., Darling and Bankes JJ.) held that they were bound by the Swansea Case (1), and gave judgment for the respondents. The tramway company appealed. Danckwerts, K.C., and C. C. Hutchinson, K.C., for the appellants. The substantial question is whether this particular tramway is a railway, or, more precisely, is " land used only as a railway constructed under the powers of an Act of Parliament"; if so, the appellants are entitled under s. 211, sub-s. 1 (b), of the Public Health Act, 1875, to be assessed in the proportion of one fourth part only of its net annual value. The Divisional Court gave no decision of its own on the point, considering itself bound by the decision in Swansea Improvements and Tramway Co. v. Swansea Urban Sanitary Authority (1) to hold that the tramway was not "used only as a railway" within the meaning of that section; but that decision is quite inconsistent with two recent cases which went to the House of Lords, Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramroad Co. v. Thornton Urban Council (2) and Wakefield and District Light Railways Co. v. Wakefield Corporation. (3) The argument for the appellants is practically summed up in some (1) [1892] 1 Q. B. 357. (2) [1907] 1 K. B. 568; [1909] A. C. 264. (3) [1907] 2 K. B. 256; [1908] A. C. 293. |