Upper Tribunal Tax and Chancery Chamber

UT/2023/000063 - [2024] UKUT 00307 (TCC)

Fecha: 28-Jun-2024

grounds of appeal

grounds of appeal

20.

The FTT refused the Appellants’ application for permission to appeal. The Upper Tribunal (Judge Bowler) granted permission to appeal on the ground that the FTT arguably made an error of law in failing correctly to interpret and apply the test of whether the Property was “suitable for use as a single dwelling” within paragraph 18(2) of Schedule 4ZA. As we have explained, we consider that on the facts the relevant test is that set out in section 116.

21.

Neither Mr Firth nor Mr Ripley appeared before the FTT, and the arguments made in this appeal differ in several respects from those which were put to the FTT. Mr Firth submits that the FTT made the following errors of law:

(1)

The FTT applied an incorrect test in law for suitability for use as a dwelling, the correct test being whether the building is suitable for occupation as a place to live as at the effective date, subject to a de minimis principle that minor works which would only take a few days to complete would not prevent suitability for use as a dwelling.

(2)

Even if, contrary to the preceding argument, the test is whether issues requiring repair are “fundamental”, the FTT reached a conclusion as to the application of that test on the facts that was outside the reasonable range.

22.

The vast majority of the submissions related to the first of these alleged errors, as does this decision. We deal briefly with the second argument towards the end of this decision.