header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 July 2013
Issue: 7567 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

VAT—Supply of goods or services—Single supply or separate supplies

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Honourable Society of the Middle Temple v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2013] UKUT 0250 (TCC), [2013] All ER (D) 127 (Jun)

Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber), Judge Sinfield and Judge J Gort, 24 May 2013

The provision of accommodation and the supply of water by the Middle Temple constituted a single supply for the purposes of VAT.

Richard Bramwell and Michael Collins for the taxpayer. Raymond Hill for the Revenue and Customs Commissioners.

The taxpayer was one of the four Inns of Court, associations whose members were barristers in England and Wales or studying to become barristers. It held land and buildings in the western part of the Temple in London (the Inn) and most of its buildings were let. The taxpayer had opted to tax its land under para 2 of Sch 10 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994, the effect of which was that the grants of leases in relation to the premises in the Inn were supplies chargeable to VAT at the standard

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll