Revenue and Customs v Jacobs: CA 22 Jul 2005

The taxpayer had converted a former residentional boarding school into a substantial private residence. He had sought to claim over andpound;300,000 VAT inputs. The Commissioners appealed the finding that he was so entitled.
Held: ‘works constitute a residential conversion to the. extent only that they consist in the conversion of a non-residential (part of a) building. If and to the extent that the works consist in the conversion of what is not non-residential, then those works are outside the scope of the subsection. A conversion qualifies not only when converting the whole of a non-residential building but also when converting a non-residential part of the building. If part is non-residential the other part must be treated as Residential, i.e., not non-residential. A conversion qualifies if it has anyone of three results namely a building designed as a dwelling or a number of dwellings, or a building intended for use solely for a residential purpose or anything which would fall within the above if different parts of a building were treated as separate buildings. The part of the building likewise has to be converted into a building designed as a dwelling or number of dwellings. The decision of the Tribunal was re-instated.


[2005] EWCA Civ 930




England and Wales


At VAT TribunalJacobs v Customs and Excise VDT 13-Feb-2004
A developer sought to set off input taxes paid in the redevelopment of a former residential boarding school as a family home.
Held: The taxpayer’s appeal succeeded. . .
Appeal fromCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Jacobs ChD 22-Oct-2004
. .
CitedCommission v United Kingdom ECJ 21-Jun-1988
Europa An action by the Commission pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty against a Member State for failure to fulfil its obligations, the bringing of which is a matter for the Commission in its entire . .
CitedCommission v Finlande ECJ 15-Jul-2004
Europa Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 77/388/EEC – VAT – Article 11(A)(1)(a) – Taxable amount – Subsidy directly linked to the price – Regulation (EC) No 603/95 – Aid granted in the . .
CitedCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Blom-Cooper ChD 12-Jul-2002
The tax payer had converted a building which had had both residential and business uses into residential use, and sought to reclaim the input tax on that part of the expenditure attributable to the residential part. The Commissioners appealed.
CitedCommissioners of Customs and Excise v Blom-Cooper CA 4-Apr-2003
The taxpayer appealed a decision that a conversion of a non-residential part of a building used for business and residential purposes was not exempt from VAT.
Held: The building was not within the definition of a self contained residential . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228995