Ian Sinclair & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 29 May 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 798 (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 an approximately 1-acre field contiguous with a purchased dwelling formed part of the dwelling's "grounds" for SDLT. The FTT carried out a multifactorial factual assessment (contiguity, proportion, use, control, history, planning status and the grazing arrangement) and found the Field formed part of the grounds despite a limited, intermittent grazing arrangement. The appeal was dismissed and HMRC's closure notice and residential-rate SDLT treatment were upheld.

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: medium

The decision applies a multifactorial, fact-and-degree approach: whether land is "grounds" is determined by overall character assessed from factors such as contiguity, proportionate relationship to the dwelling, ownership/control, use and history; no single factor is decisive. Limited, intermittent commercial use (here, a grazing arrangement serving mainly maintenance) does not necessarily preclude land from being part of the grounds where the other factors point to a residential character.

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 judgment indicates (non-bindingly) that planning classification as agricultural, council-tax/business-rates treatment, and marketing descriptions are relevant but not conclusive for SDLT character, and that unsigned or undated agreements can be admissible evidence of an existing arrangement if corroborated by other material.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML