Jody Scheckter v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 3 September 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1280 (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 sideways loss relief should be denied for losses in Laverstoke Park Produce LLP (LLP) under ITA ss.66–67, arising from its integrated business with Laverstoke Abattoirs Ltd (the Company). The Tribunal found the LLP carried on a single trade of farming, and that the LLP and the Company together formed a larger trading undertaking, but the farming trade was not ancillary to that undertaking and the LLP’s trade (viewed alone) was not carried on on a commercial basis, so ss.67(2) and 66(2)(a) applied and the appeal was dismissed.
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 held that “undertaking” or “larger trading undertaking” can extend to activities conducted across more than one legal entity where those activities are integrated and managed as a single enterprise; however, for s.67(3)(a) the farming trade must be both part of and ancillary to that larger undertaking to be excluded, and for s.66(2)(a) the commercial-basis test applies to the trade of the relevant entity (here the LLP) alone — failure by the LLP to monetise a significant asset (the brand) supported the finding it was not carried on commercially.
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 Parliament could have limited “undertaking” to a single legal person if that had been intended, and made practical comments on evidential weight where contemporaneous documents are sparse (noting acceptance of credible long-serving witness testimony) and that arm’s-length accounting between separate entities does not preclude finding a single larger undertaking where integration is evident.