Cantrell (t/a Foxearth Lodge) v Commissioners of Customs & Excise

Cantrell (t/a Foxearth Lodge) v Commissioners of Customs & Excise

The new ESMI unit was not an annexe to the New Barn as it was not an adjunct or accessory to it; neither contiguity, common ownership, nor inclusion in the same complex sufficed. The Tribunal erred in law by treating mere association as sufficient for an annexe. The works are therefore zero-rated.

Parties
Appellant: Cantrell; Respondent: Commissioners of Customs & Excise
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal From VAT and Duties Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Value Added Tax, Zero Rating, Construction of Buildings, Statutory Interpretation
Tax Law Value Added Tax Zero Rating Construction of Buildings Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cantrell

Appellant

Commissioners of Customs & Excise

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From VAT and Duties Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the construction works constituted an 'annexe' to an existing building under Note 16(c) of Schedule 8 to the VAT Act 1994, thereby excluding zero-rating.

Ratio Decidendi

The new ESMI unit was not an annexe to the New Barn as it was not an adjunct or accessory to it; neither contiguity, common ownership, nor inclusion in the same complex sufficed. The Tribunal erred in law by treating mere association as sufficient for an annexe. The works are therefore zero-rated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that the works comprised in Phases I and II did not constitute the construction of an annexe to any existing building and are zero-rated.
  • Assessment discharged.