Byrne v Secretary of State for the Environment Queen’s Bench Division, 27 February 1997
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravans; Change of use; Enforcement notices
Where Reported: (1997) 74 P. & C.R. 420; [1998] J.P.L. 122
Documents: Case Analysis (1997) 74 P. & C.R. 420
Terms in Context:
…ByrneSecretary of State for the Environment BYRNE V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (1997) 74 P …
…QBDQueen’s Bench Division UK United Kingdom 27 February 1997 Judge Rich Q.C. Rich, QC, HHJ (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Caravans Change of use Enforcement notices caravans log cabin application of construction and mobility test A issued an enforcement notice on B to remove a log cabin on his land, on the basis that it was to be treated as a caravan within the meaning of the Town and Country Planning Acts. The inspector upheld the notice, but decided that the cabin was a structure which had involved the carrying out of building operations on the land, not being a caravan within the meaning of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 s.13 The enforcement period was therefore four years. B applied to quash that decision. Held, dismissing the application, that (1) the inspector’s conclusion that the cabin was not assembled on site out of two separately constructed sections was conclusive that it was not a caravan within s.13(1)(a), and s.13(2) the “mobility test” of s.13(1)(b) required mobility to be tested by reference to the circumstances of assembly, not just the assembled state. B Christopher Boyle. the Secretary of State Natalie …
…98 (C.S.); (2002) 99(37) L.S.G. 38; (2002) 146 S.J.L.B. 201; [2002] N.P.C. 104; Times, August 19, 2002; Official TranscriptCaravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(1) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(1)(a) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(1)(b) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(2) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(i)(a) Caravan Sites and Development Act 1960 Part I Caravan Sites and Development Act 1960 s.29(1) Stationing of log cabin on land – enforcement notice. J.P.L. 1998, Feb, 122-131 Buildings Caravans Change of use Enforcement notices Immunities Time limits 1997257688 724…
2.
Field Place Caravan Park Ltd v Harding (Valuation Officer) Court of Appeal, 11 May 1966
Subject: Rates; Real property
Keywords: Caravans; Occupation; Rateable value
Where Reported: [1966] 2 Q.B. 484; [1966] 3 W.L.R. 198; [1966] 3 All E.R. 247; (1966) 130 J.P. 397; 64 L.G.R. 399; 198 E.G. 785; [1966] R.A. 393; [1966] R.V.R. 446; 13 R.R.C. 74; (1966) 110 S.J. 386
Documents: Case Analysis [1966] 2 Q.B. 484 [1966] 3 W.L.R. 198
Terms in Context:
…decisions the local valuation court had held that each of the premises, being plots of land (“pitches”) forming parts of caravan sites on which caravans had been stationed for purposes of human habitation, was occupied by the owner of the caravan stationed thereon and that the pitch and caravan together constituted a separate rateable hereditament. In the decision of the Lands Tribunal, the Inland Revenue were said to regard the appeals as test cases to establish the general principles that should guide the valuation officer in assessing such hereditaments. The respondent to the …
…a slightly different angle or slightly different depth within the pitch and this happened frequently when a new, probably larger, caravan came onto the pitch and occasionally in the course of reorganisation by the operator of his site; only the site operator or a dealer authorised by him was allowed to tow a caravan onto a pitch or alter the position of a caravan already on a pitch. (3) All these activities on caravan sites were carried on by the site operators without asking any leave of the caravan dweller, and by virtue of their ownership of the site. (4) Save in case of emergencies ( e.g ., fire) or when at the request of the caravan dweller the site operator occasionally looked after a caravan while the dweller was 487 away, the site operator did not go into or claim any right to enter the caravans themselves. (5) At Field Place there were three types of caravan pitches, being for residential, static holiday and touring caravans. Some of the static holiday caravans, particularly since the coming into force of the site licence, were removed from their pitches to the car park area for winter storage, while others had remained on the same pitches throughout the year. All the test caravans had in fact so remained from the date of the proposal to the date of hearing. Some caravans, while remaining on the same pitch, had changed ownership more than once in the last few years. (6) Normally pitches of static holiday caravans were paid for in advance for the season, whereas payment for a pitch for a residential caravan was usually on a weekly basis. Holiday caravans were occupied intermittently, and for odd weekends. During the summer many holiday caravan owners would come down say for Whitsun, for a long weekend and for their main fortnight’s holiday. (b) A caravan dweller did not regard himself as having control of his pitch. On the other hand he regarded his caravan entirely as his own and not subject to internal interference by the site operator. (c) All the caravans on all the sites were capable of being moved in themselves, although many of the large single caravans and all the “twin unit” caravans had to be moved upon transporters on the public highway. This was only because of statutory restrictions and not because of the construction of the caravan. When such caravans, even the “twin units,” were assembled on a site they could be and were towed from one part of the …
…M. J. Albery Q.C. and Jeremiah Harman for the appellants. This appeal, raising the question of the rateability of residential caravans, is regarded by the parties as a test case. It concerns a fundamental principle of the law of rating. Mobile caravans have never before been rated. These caravans are mobile and so are chattels. An attempt has been made for the first time to rate, not the site owner, but the owner of the caravan. For rateable occupation there must be a degree of permanence. Permanence is essentially a question of fact. It is the …
…present case the President of the Lands Tribunal directed himself rightly and said: “I come to the conclusion that those caravan owners satisfied the test of exclusive occupation.” That is a finding of fact with which this court has no power to interfere. The caravan dweller is in paramount occupation of both caravan and pitch. We are referred to cases under the planning legislation on the word “occupier.” I would only say that …
…relied upon on behalf of the appellants. It seems to me that once you come to the conclusion that the caravan with the caravan pitch could properly be described as a hereditament, the well-established test as to whether the appellants’ occupation of this unit is rateable depends upon four questions. First, are the appellants in…
3.
Brightlingsea Haven Ltd v Morris Queen’s Bench Division, 30 October 2008
Subject: Real property
Keywords: Constructive trusts; Mobile homes; Proprietary estoppel; Tenancies
Where Reported: [2008] EWHC 1928 (QB); [2009] 2 P. & C.R. 11; [2009] 1 E.G.L.R. 117; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis [2009] 2 P. & C.R. 11 Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…1928 (QB)UK United Kingdom Official 30 October 2008 Jack, J. Jack J Real property Proprietary estoppel Mobile homes Tenancies Constructive trusts Proprietary estoppel Constructive trusts Purchase of lodges on caravan site in expectation of grant of lease Propriety of granting lease by way of constructive trust The claimant caravan park owner (B) sought an injunction preventing the defendant residents (R) occupying their lodges on the park during the day …
…they would be able to use them during the day. They were entitled to rely on the creation of a constructive trust through proprietary estoppel, to avoid the bar on any assertion that they were contractually entitled to leases caused by the lack of a contract in writing. The Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s.2(5) excepted constructive trusts from the provisions of s.2(1); (2) the lodges were not caravans within the meaning of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 and the Caravan Sites Act 1968 , meaning that no criminal offence had been caused under s.9(1) of the 1960 Act when …
…no bar under the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s.2(1) to owners of lodges on a caravan site being granted leases by way of constructive trusts. They had bought the lodges in the expectation they would be granted leases, giving rise to a proprietary estoppel …
…C.S.); [1993] N.P.C. 97; Times, June 28, 1993; Independent, July 6, 1993Odina v Mackland Ltd Unreported, May 27, 2009 Caravan Act 1968 s.13(1) Caravan Act 1968 s.13 Caravan Act 1968 s.1(2)(b) Caravan Act 1968 s.13(2) Caravan Act 1968 s.13.1 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) Caravan Act 1968 Part 1 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) Part 1 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1(1) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1(2) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1(2)(b) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.1(3)(b) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(2) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13.1 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.7(2) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13(1) Caravan Sites Act 1968 and Social Landlords (Permissible Additional Purposes) (England) Order 2006 (Definition of Caravan) (Amendment) (England) Order 2006 (SI 2006 2374) art.2(a) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) Part 1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) Sch.5 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.5(1) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.5(6) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.12 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.29 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.29(1) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.3 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.5 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.5(1)(d) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.5(i) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.9 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.9(1) European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Art.8 …
…Act 1967 (c.7) s.2Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.5 Caravan Act 1968 s.1(2) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s.1(2) Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.42) s.1(2)(b) Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c.34) s…
4.
Colaingrove Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 19 February 2004
Subject: VAT; Tax; Hospitality and leisure
Keywords: Caravan sites; EC law; Exclusion; Exempt supplies
Where Reported: [2004] EWCA Civ 146; [2004] S.T.C. 712; [2004] B.T.C. 5149; [2004] B.V.C. 209; [2004] S.T.I. 442; [2004] 9 E.G. 145 (C.S.); [2004] N.P.C. 26; Times, February 27, 2004; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…February 2004Thorpe, L.J. Thorpe LJ Arden, L.J. Arden LJ Neuberger, L.J. (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited VAT Tax Hospitality and leisure Caravan sites EC law Exclusion Exempt supplies exempt supplies exclusions static caravan pitches C appealed against Customs’ decision that the letting of caravan sites for seasonal pitches incurred VAT pursuant to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch.9 Part II Group 1 …
…exempt. C further contended that there were anomalies in the exclusion from exemption of seasonal pitches, that the letting of caravans on seasonal pitches was not structurally suited to VAT, and that the exclusion of letting of seasonal pitches would apply even if the no sleep provision was only for one night and would also apply to caravans used for the storage of goods. The exclusion of the letting of seasonal pitches for caravans, which were unlikely to be occupied as a person’s main residence, from the exemption to pay VAT was not incompatible …
…considering whether to restrict an exemption and also as to the respects in which the restriction should be achieved. The test chosen by the Act in the case of caravan pitches was the test of seasonality. The European Court had in Blasi v Finanzamt Munchen I (C-346/95) Blasi v Finanzamt Munchen I (C-346/95) [1998] All E.R. (EC) 211 applied the test of reasonableness to the decision of the German Government to impose temporality as the test for exempting non hotel type accommodation and the instant court should apply the same approach, Blasi considered; (2) the examples …
…whether or not a seasonal pitch was to be used simply as a person’s dwelling. It was accepted that the test of seasonality in the case of static caravan licences met the test of reasonableness. The exclusion of such property from the lettings exemption was consistent with the rationale of the exemption; (3) the exclusion of the letting of seasonal pitches for caravans, which were unlikely to be occupied as a person’s main residence and as in the instant case were not permitted …
…Part IIValue Added Tax Act 1994 Sch.9 Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch.9 Part II Group 1 Caravan pitches and VAT. E.P.S. 2004, 2(6), 15 Caravan sites Exemptions Licences VAT 2004117820 723…
5.
Talacre Beach Caravan Sales Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners Chancery Division, 5 February 2004
Subject: VAT
Keywords: Caravans; Supplies; Zero rating
Where Reported: [2004] EWHC 165 (Ch); [2004] S.T.C. 817; [2004] B.T.C. 5478; [2004] B.V.C. 538; [2004] S.T.I. 312; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…to expect that there would be problems on the boundaries; just what is to be included within the meaning of “caravan”? Would it include, for example, the built-in framework of a bed within the caravan and would that be included even if the framework was not required to contribute or contribute substantially to the structure of the caravan? As to “removable contents”, what test for removability would be employed? A mattress, for example, could be expected to be lifted and put out through a window or door without disturbing anything else but what of an unfixed dining room table, put inside the caravan before fitting-out was completed and which, by reason of its size and shape, was no longer capable of being …
…contents might be, so long, (as is likely), as they fall within a single supply for VAT purposes of a caravan they must be zero-rated. Thus if a new static caravan were to be supplied on a “turn-key” basis such that the purchaser would, on paying his one all-in price, walk in to a static caravan fully fitted out (without the customer having a choice to decline these items) with a lady’s hairdryer, a man’s trouser-press, a coffee percolator, a kettle and a television all within the caravan, those items, whilst undeniably “removable contents”, would, argues Mr Cordara, be no less zero-rated than the standard features in …
…were seen by the Commission to be inoffensive and acceptable in Community terms. The unchallenged ones, including as to static caravans, can be taken, so to speak, to have survived the Community test. Amongst the zero-ratings challenged were those headed “Construction of buildings etc.” which included an exemption of builders’ materials similar, though not identical, to that to be found in the current domestic legislation. The ECJ held that within the zero-rating headed “Construction of buildings” the provisions relating to residential buildings were acceptable. At its paragraph 36 at page 474 the ECJ said …
…have no right to deduct VAT, that is to say non-taxable persons.”It follows from the zero-rating of caravans being taken to have survived the Community test in 1981–1988 that the Commission accepted or was not willing to challenge that such zero-rating was an implementation …
…in respect of their supply and it could or would introduce both social and fiscal distortions if dwellers in static caravans were otherwise treated.If the removable contents of a static caravan, by way of their being ancillary goods within the principal supply of the zero-rated caravan, were to be such that they had to receive the same tax treatment as that caravan, as Mr Cordara argues, then, argues Mr Anderson, the single supply notion would have created a zero-rating that not…
6.
Greenwich LBC v Powell House of Lords, 8 December 1988
Subject: Local government
Keywords: Caravan sites; Gypsies; Local authorities powers and duties; Possession; Protected areas; Statutory interpretation
Where Reported: [1989] A.C. 995; [1989] 2 W.L.R. 7; [1989] 1 All E.R. 65; (1989) 21 H.L.R. 218; 87 L.G.R. 423; (1989) 57 P. & C.R. 249; [1989] 1 P.L.R. 108; [1989] J.P.L. 513; (1989) 153 L.G. Rev. 328; (1989) 86(3) L.S.G. 44; (1989) 133 S.J. 46
Documents: Case Analysis [1989] A.C. 995 [1989] 2 W.L.R. 7 (1989) 21 H.L.R. 218 (1989) 57 P. & C.R. 249
Terms in Context:
…HarwichLord Templeman Lord Griffiths Lord Ackner and Lord Lowry 1988 Nov. 7, 8; Dec. 8 Local Government—Powers—Gipsies—Caravan site—Provision by local authority in discharge of duty to provide accommodation for gipsies—Gipsy occupier away from site several months of year—Permanent residence on site—Whether site “protected site”—”Gipsies”—Meaning— Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c. 52), ss. 6(1), 16 Mobile Homes Act 1983 (c. 34), s. 5(1) By section 6 of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 Caravan Sites Act 1968, s. 6 : see post, p. 1006G-H. S. 16: see post, p. 1006F-G. local authorities were …
…consider or refer at all to the problems pointed out by the judge.In any event, the Court of Appeal’s test (“the exercise is to determine whether the land is occupied as a continuing operation at the material time as a caravan site providing accommodation for gipsies”: per Purchas L.J.) is unworkable, for the reasons stated by the judge. In addition, having regard to the Court of Appeal’s construction of section 16, the plaintiffs (or any local authority providing a gipsy site) would not know, because the Court of …
…council.” The respondents are Mr. and Mrs. Powell. I shall refer to them as “the Powells.” The council own a caravan site known as the Thistlebrook Caravan Site at Abbey Wood, S.E.2. The Powells occupy part of the site known as Pad J1, on which they are permitted to station two caravans pursuant to the terms of an agreement with the council. In October 1986 the council gave the Powells four weeks …
…importance for local authorities. It can only be understood in the context of the historical development of the legislation governing caravan sites. In the 1950s the mushrooming of residential caravan sites to alleviate the acute shortage of conventional housing presented many problems to local planning authorities which their powers under the Town and Country Planning Acts were inadequate to resolve. The first direct statutory control over caravan sites as such was imposed by the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 This established a system of licensing of caravan sites by local authorities which gave effective control over both the establishment of new sites and the conditions 1006 under …
…were themselves the licensing authorities, were not required to be licensed: paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 Part I of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 introduced for the first time a very limited form of statutory security of tenure for the occupier of a residential caravan on a “protected site” as defined by section 1(2) , either as licensee of a pitch on which to station his own caravan or as occupier of a caravan belonging to the site owner. In each case his contractual right could only be determined by four weeks’ notice and…
7.
Mole Valley DC v Smith Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 27 February 1992
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravan sites; Gypsies; Injunctions; Local authorities powers and duties; Planning control
Where Reported: (1992) 24 H.L.R. 442; 90 L.G.R. 557; (1992) 64 P. & C.R. 491; [1992] 3 P.L.R. 22; [1992] E.G. 26 (C.S.); [1992] N.P.C. 26; Times, March 3, 1992
Documents: Case Analysis (1992) 24 H.L.R. 442 (1992) 64 P. & C.R. 491
Terms in Context:
…M.R.Donaldson of Lymington, Lord, MR Balcombe, L.J. Balcombe LJ Stuart-Smith, L.J. Stuart-Smith LJ (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited Planning Caravan sites Gypsies Injunctions Local authorities powers and duties Planning control Gypsies unlawful development local authority in breach of duty to …
…to enforce planning controlThe fact that an authority were in breach of their duty to provide sites under the Caravan Sites Act 1968 s.6 was not of itself a reason for the courts to review the decision of the …
…but the unlawful user continued. In both areas occupied by the groups of gypsies, insufficient provision had been made for caravan sites. Both local authorities commenced proceedings under the Local Government Act 1972 s.222 , seeking injunctions to prevent further breaches …
…November 15, 1993; Times, February 1, 1994Brentwood BC v Ball [2009] EWHC 2433 (QB); [2009] N.P.C. 111; Official Transcript Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.6 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.7 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.8(1) Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.9 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.13 Caravan Sites Act 1968 (c.52) s.16 Caravan Sites Act 1968 Part II Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.24 Housing Act 1985 (c.68) Local Government Act 1972 …
…lawHuman rights Minorities Nuisance Regulation The use of injunctions under TCPA 1990 Section 187B J.P.L. 2004, Jan, 8-16 Caravans Gypsies Injunctions Planning control Right to respect for private and family life Dirty gypsies – ex turpi causa and human rights H.R. 2002, Dec, 204-210 Caravan sites Discrimination Gypsies Human rights Planning control Moving on S.J. 2003, 147(26), 766-767 Discrimination Gypsies Planning control Right…
8.
Motor Vehicles (Tests) Regulations 1981/1694
Part I GENERAL
reg. 3 Interpretation
Version in force from: April 1, 2010 to present (version 14 of 14)
Terms in Context:
…the Road Traffic Act 1972 “the 1981 Act” means the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 Definition inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 2003/1113 reg.3(1)(a) (June 1, 2003) “the 1988 Act” means the Road Traffic Act 1988 Substituted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) (No. 1) Regulations 1991/253 reg.3(a)(i) (March 18, 1991) “the Construction and Use Regulations” means the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 Substituted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) (No. 1) Regulations 1991/253 reg.3(a)(ii) (March 18, 1991) “the Lighting Regulations” means the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 Words inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 1985/45 reg.3 (March 1, 1985) “agricultural motor vehicle” “articulated bus” “articulated vehicle” “dual-purpose vehicle” Definition inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 2000/1432 reg.3 (June 26, 2000) “exhaust system” Definition inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 1998/1672 reg.3(a)(i) (August 1, 1998) “minibus” Words added by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) (No. 1) Regulations 1991/253 reg.3(a)(iii) (March 18, 1991) “Ministry plate” “pedestrian controlled vehicle” “track laying” and “works truck” have the meanings given by Words substituted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 1998/1672 reg.3(a)(ii) (August 1, 1998) regulation 3(2) of the Construction and Use Regulations “authorisation” means any authorisation in writing by the Secretary of State of an individual, persons in partnership …
…to carry out examinations of such classes of motor vehicles as may be specified therein;Definitions inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 1998/1672 reg.3(b) (August 1, 1998) “child restraint” “disabled person’s belt” “forward-facing seat” and “seat belt” have the meanings given by regulation 47(8) of the Construction and Use Regulations; Definition inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 2003/1113 reg.3(1)(e) (June 1, 2003) “communication” includes a communication comprising sounds or images or both and a communication effecting a payment Definition inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regulations 1991/1525 reg.3 (August 1, 1991) “Community Recording Equipment Regulation” has the meaning given in section 85 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 “company” means a body corporate Added by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) (No. 1) Regulations 1991/253 reg.3(a)(iv) (March 18, 1991) “design gross weight” means (a) in the …
…examinations;“firm” has the meaning given by section 4 of the Partnership Act 1890 “goods vehicle” means a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of goods or burden of any description, including a living van but excluding— Paras.(i) and (ii) substituted by paras.(i), (ii) and (iii) by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 1983/1434 reg.3 (November 1, 1983) (i) a dual-purpose vehicle, (ii) a motor caravan, and (iii) a play bus, Substituted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 1997/81 reg.3(2) (March 3, 1997) “goods vehicle testing station” means a station provided by the Secretary of State under section 52(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 Definition inserted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 2003/1113 reg.3(1)(e) (June 1, 2003) “inspector” means a person appointed by a designated council …
…1981 Act;“motor bicycle” means a two wheeled motor cycle, whether having a sidecar attached to it or not; “motor caravan” means a motor vehicle (not being a living van) which is constructed or adapted for the carriage of passengers and their effects and which contains, as permanently installed equipment, the facilities which …
…vehicle examiners) of the 1988 Act“serial number” , in relation to a vehicle the chassis of which has not been constructed separately from its superstructure, means the number given to, and for the purpose of identifying, the vehicle by its manufacturer; Definition repealed by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 2003/1113 reg.3(1)(d) (June 1, 2003) Substituted by Motor Vehicles (Tests) (Amendment) Regulations 1997/81 reg.3(3) (March 3, 1997) “vehicle testing station” means premises at which the Secretary of State has authorised an examiner to carry out examinations, premises provided by…
9.
University of Kent v Customs and Excise Commissioners VAT and Duties Tribunal (London), 24 May 2004
Subject: VAT
Keywords: Caravans; Hiring; Student accommodation; Zero rating
Where Reported: [2004] B.V.C. 2215; [2004] V. & D.R. 372; [2004] S.T.I. 1948; Official Transcript
Documents: Case Analysis Official Transcript
Terms in Context:
…University of KentCustoms and Excise Commissioners UNIVERSITY OF KENT V CUSTOMS & EXCISE COMMISSIONERS [2004] B.V.C. 2215 …
…UKEWEngland and Wales Transcript 24 May 2004 John Clark (Chairman) Clark, John, Chairman Catherine Farquharson (c)Sweet & Maxwell Limited VAT Caravans Hiring Student accommodation Zero rating zero rating student accommodation sleeper units hired as temporary student accommodation definition of caravans immovable property The appellant university (K) appealed against a decision of the respondent commissioners that sleeping units it had installed …
…and a bathroom, but no kitchen or other cooking facilities. The commissioners took the view that the units were not caravans within the definition in the Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch.8 Group 9 s.30 as they were not self contained living accommodation. K contended that (1) the units were equivalent to mobile homes and therefore counted as caravans for the purposes of the Act; (2) alternatively, the units were immovable property and therefore zero rated under the Sixth Council Directive Art.13B(b) Held, dismissing the appeal, that (1) the word “caravan” was not defined in the Act. Some assistance could be gleaned from its use in the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 s.29(1) , on which the commissioners tended to rely, but other tests were also required. Such tests depended on the purpose behind zero rating of caravans, which was clearly intended to treat them as residential accommodation in the same way as houses. In order to be seen as such, a caravan would need to share the basic essentials of a house, which was to provide a place for shelter, sleeping, cooking …
…W.L.R. 66; [1979] 3 All E.R. 250; (1980) 39 P. & C.R. 110; (1979) 251 E.G. 265; (1979) 123 S.J. 505Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.29 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 (c.62) s.29(1) Finance Act 1972 (c.41) Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (SI 1986 1078) reg.8 Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (SI 1986 1078) reg.8(1) Sixth Council Directive Art.13B(b) Sixth Council Directive on …
…Added Tax Act 1994 Sch.8 Group 9 s.30Mobile homes. VAT Int. 2004, 22(7), 2102-2103 Accommodation Caravans EC law Exemptions VAT Zero rating 2006585273 725…
10.
Stevens v Bromley LBC Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 13 December 1971
Subject: Planning
Keywords: Caravan sites; Enforcement notices; Occupancy
Where Reported: [1972] Ch. 400; [1972] 2 W.L.R. 605; [1972] 1 All E.R. 712; 70 L.G.R. 170; (1972) 23 P. & C.R. 142; (1971) 116 S.J. 123; Times, December 15, 1971
Documents: Case Analysis [1972] Ch. 400 [1972] 2 W.L.R. 605 (1972) 23 P. & C.R. 142
Terms in Context:
…there must be some degree of control over the land and some degree of continuity of occupation. One of the tests of rateable occupation is whether or not the occupation is transient. If the caravan is, e.g., for two weekly holidays’ use only it would not be necessary for the planning authority to serve an …
…to be served would be intolerable. They are not in a position to make the decisions. The local planning authority’s construction means a planning authority need determine only who has an interest in land – section 215 of the Act of 1962. Caravans and Automobiles Ltd. v. Southall Borough Council [1963] 1 W.L.R. 690 , 694 is consistent with the planning authority’s construction of section 45. An occupier is a person who by virtue of an estate or interest in land is entitled …
…fact that the caravanners were invited on the land in the absence of a site licence. He seeks to apply tests of degree of control and transience by reference to rateability which he admits is different from planning. [ Reference was made to Field Place Caravan Park Ltd. v. Harding [1966] 2 Q.B. 484 , 499; and section 12 of the Act of 1968.] Even exclusive possession …
…planning authority that the land has been developed by: (a) The carrying out thereon of civil engineering operations, namely the construction of a road and hard standings for caravans, and (b) the making of a material change in the use of the land to use as a caravan site by the stationing thereon of caravans for the purposes of human habitation without the planning permission required in respect thereof under Part III of the Town …
…works which, in the nature of things, involved a good deal more than simply clearing the site of a few caravans and which would probably require a not insubstantial period of time to complete.For my part, I am prepared to apply the two tests of (a) degree of control and (b) duration propounded by Mr. Albery and to hold that, unless he can satisfy them, a person living on a caravan site has no legal right to have an enforcement notice served upon him. But at least one of those served satisfied both tests, for Mr. Wicks had been on the site 414 some seven months when an enforcement notice (describing him