Marie Guerlain-Desai v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 14 June 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 515 (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 c.12 acres of woodland included in the single title for Durford House formed part of the "garden or grounds" of the dwelling for SDLT purposes at the acquisition date. The FTT applied the established multi‑factorial test (contiguity, use, extent, accessibility, legal constraints, functional relationship etc.) and found the woods were openly used by the public and lacked a functional relationship to the house, so they were not part of the dwelling's grounds. The tribunal allowed the appeal and concluded the purchaser was entitled to mixed‑use SDLT treatment rather than the higher residential rate.
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
When deciding whether adjoining land is part of a dwelling's "grounds" for section 116(1)(b) FA 2003, the tribunal must apply a multi‑factorial balancing exercise at the completion date; factors such as substantial public use and absence of a functional relationship to the dwelling can outweigh common ownership and contiguity and lead to a conclusion that the land is not part of the grounds.
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 suggested (obiter) that marketing materials and sales brochures should be treated with caution if they conflict with occupier evidence about actual use or visibility, and that obligations to contribute to communal maintenance or presence of restrictive covenants are not determinative on their own whether land forms part of the grounds.