TC09497 - [2025] UKFTT 00460 (TC)

Mr Constable’s evidence was that in the educational landscape, it is essential to distinguish between a "course" that leads to a formal qualification and "supplementary resources" that support the learning process. Mr Constable’s evidence was that a course typically includes a structured curriculum, instructional content, and formal assessments, leading to a recognised qualification. In contrast, supplementary assessment resources are designed to support and enhance learning by helping students identify gaps in their understanding, thereby guiding further study. His evidence was that ConquerMaths is a supplementary resource. This was in contrast to another venture he had been involved in called OnLine Education Ltd, which involved the development and delivery of hybrid and fully online degree programmes in collaboration with UK universities.

We accepted his evidence that there is a difference between courses that lead to formal qualifications and supplementary resources that support the learning process and that ConquerMaths is a supplementary resource. However, it did not seem to us that the distinction Mr Constable sought to draw between courses that lead to formal qualifications and supplementary resources assisted GM in their argument that ConquerMaths is an exempt examination service. Indeed, we considered that the absence of any formal qualification being provided by GM as part of its offering tended if anything to point away from its product being an examination service because in our judgment a typical examination service will lead to a qualification which the ConquerMaths product did not.

Mr. Constable gave evidence in relation to the question of the standard to which ConquerMaths assessed. It was put to Mr Constable that the essence of an examination was an assessment to an objective third party standard. Mr Constable's evidence was that ConquerMaths assessed to the standard of the answer being right (and in this respect he asserted that maths differed from other subjects in that there was always a right answer). Mr Constable’s evidence was that for each age group ConquerMaths provided age appropriate assessments of relevant topics and by doing assessments the pupil could determine if they were getting the answers for those topics correct and identify any areas requiring teaching. Mr. Constable accepted that this was not an assessment to a third-party standard. We accepted that ConquerMaths's diagnostic test questions all have a right answer. But it did not seem to us that this bore helpfully on whether ConquerMaths was an examination service. In our judgment an examination assesses to an objective (often third party) standard and simply getting a correct answer in a maths diagnostic test does not show a pupil has taken part in an examination.