The appellant appealed a decision of the Assessment Review Board regarding the property tax assessments for a shopping mall for the 1996 and 1997 taxation years.
The appellant argued the Board erred by failing to use a recent arm's length sale price as the best evidence of market value, and by applying a 'current value' approach rather than a 'market value' approach.
The Divisional Court held that the Board's treatment of the recent sale was a question of mixed fact and law and thus not appealable.
However, the Court found the Board erred in law by applying a 'current value' (unencumbered fee simple) approach, which was introduced by 1997 amendments not applicable to the years in question.
The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the Board for redetermination based on the correct 'market value' test.
