Space 2 Build Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 12 February 2010

Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 66 (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

Space 2 Build Ltd appealed VAT assessments totalling £31,210 relating to refurbishment works at 20 Roland Way, arguing the works were supplied pursuant to a partnership and not liable to VAT and that an earlier Customs letter created a legitimate expectation not to charge VAT. The Tribunal found the contractor performed the works under a separate tender/contract with Dunster Holdings Ltd and was paid contractual sums (not a profit share), held the works were a VATable supply, and rejected the legitimate expectation argument. The appeal was dismissed and the assessments 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: high

Where a contractor carries out building works under a separate tender or contract with a company distinct from a partnership, that contract constitutes a supply for VAT purposes notwithstanding partnership arrangements; payment of a contractual sum for works is not the same as receiving a partnership profit share and does not remove VAT liability.

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 that misunderstandings from earlier Customs correspondence may have affected parties' expectations but do not change the legal character of the supply; it also expressed some caution about its jurisdiction to decide legitimate expectation in view of conflicting High Court authority.