Telamara Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 16 October 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 1123 (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
Telamara Ltd supplied 8g nitrous oxide (N2O) "cream chargers" and argued they were "food of a kind used for human consumption" for VAT zero‑rating under Item 1 Group 1 Schedule 8 VATA. The tribunal found, on the evidence and expert material, that the N2O in those chargers is not food and that the supplies are correctly standard‑rated, dismissing the appeal. The tribunal upheld HMRC's assessments.
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 tribunal applied an overall assessment from the perspective of an informed consumer, weighing factors such as nutritional value, form, manner and purpose of consumption, marketing and range of uses; where a product lacks hallmarks of ordinary food those factors are of limited relevance. It held that regulatory classification as a food additive or bearing an E‑number does not by itself make a substance "food" for the Item 1 VAT zero‑rating test.
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 observed that N2O, being a gas that cannot be eaten or drunk and imperceptible in the quantities supplied, is unlikely to be regarded as food by an informed observer. It drew analogies distinguishing N2O from baking ingredients like bicarbonate of soda and likening it more to gases used in beer dispensing that were not treated as food in prior discussion.