Rushby Dance and Fitness Centre & Ors v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 29 May 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 594 (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 case concerns four linked VAT appeals on whether private dance tuition provided by the appellants falls within the Schedule 9, Group 6 exemption for subjects "ordinarily taught in schools or universities" and whether certain supplies were private tuition by individuals acting independently. The tribunal held that DCI's teaching members acted on their own account so DCI's appeal succeeds in principle; by contrast Rushby, Jagers and Mrs Hilton did not show their disputed classes were in subjects commonly taught in schools or universities, so those supplies are standard-rated and their appeals were dismissed. Practical consequences for DCI (which specific classes were taught by members) were left to the parties to agree with liberty to apply to the tribunal.
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 binding reasoning is that (1) private tuition for the Group 6 exemption requires the teacher to act on their own account and at their own risk, and partners or LLP members who teach can do so on that basis; and (2) to qualify as tuition in a subject "ordinarily taught in schools or universities" the particular activity or style must be shown to be commonly taught in schools or universities—a general label (such as a specific dance style or branded class) does not suffice without evidence of common school/university teaching. Tuition requires a transfer of knowledge and skills but need not have academic content.
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 obiter that there is a continuum between generic school-taught subjects and specific styles, and that evidence is needed to establish where on that continuum a particular style sits. It also observed that absence of a set course, classroom element or qualification does not automatically make tuition purely recreational, and that late documentary evidence should generally be admitted if it causes no material prejudice and the other party has already seen or relied on the material.