W.R.(Bill) Dunster v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 30 September 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 462 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerned whether the Appellant's purpose-built floating home "Zedfactory" qualified as "the construction of a building designed as a dwelling" for the DIY builders' VAT refund. The Tribunal found the structure to be a houseboat or other floating decked structure within Item 2 of Group 9 of Schedule 8, not a "building" for Group 5 purposes, and dismissed the appeal. No refund was allowed.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
The decision rests on statutory classification: a dwelling attracts the DIY refund only if it falls within the "building" treatment in Group 5, and where the statute separately treats houseboats/floating decked structures in Group 9, such structures are not to be read into Group 5. Therefore the Zedfactory as a floating houseboat/decked structure is excluded from the Group 5 "building" definition and the DIY refund.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The Tribunal noted that advice from the VAT helpline does not bind HMRC and any misdirection by the helpline is a matter for HMRC's complaints process rather than for the Tribunal. The Tribunal also expressed sympathy for the Appellant's position and perceived unfairness of the outcome, but emphasised that it must apply the statutory wording.