Jones Brothers Ruthin (Civil Engineering) Co. Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 24 March 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 206 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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 large granite blocks from a St Malo quarry were subject to the aggregates levy or fell within the s.18(2)(a) exemption for stone produced by a process producing one or more flat surfaces. The Tribunal found two distinct operations: severance from the rock face and a deliberate post-severance cutting/resizing process (sawing, drilling and plug-and-feather splitting) producing regular flat-faced blocks. Because the flat faces were produced intentionally by that further process, the blocks fell within the exempt process and the appeal 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

Where rock is severed from the quarry face and then subjected to a deliberate post-severance cutting or shaping process whose object is to produce stone with one or more flat surfaces, that subsequent process can qualify as the s.18(2)(a) "exempt process" and exclude the stone from the aggregates levy; incidental or unintentional flat faces produced merely as part of extraction do not satisfy the exemption.

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 indicated that "flat" need not mean perfectly smooth—corrugated but level surfaces can be regarded as flat for the purposes of the exemption; and the intended end-use of the stone does not determine exemption where there is clear evidence of deliberate cutting to produce flat surfaces.