[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Glenshee Chairlift Company Ltd v Customs and Excise [2003] UKVAT V18162 (27 May 2003) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2003/V18162.html Cite as: [2003] UKVAT V18162

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

18162

Supply: movement of persons by chairlift and tows for the purpose of skiing, whether zero rated supply – No – VATA 1994 Sch 5 Group 10 Item 4.

EDINBURGH TRIBUNAL CENTRE

GLENSHEE CHAIRLIFT COMPANY LIMITED Appellant

- and -

THE COMMISSIONERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE Respondents

Tribunal: (Chairman) T Gordon Coutts, QC

(Member) Mrs Helen M Dunn, LL.B.

Sitting in Edinburgh on Wednesday 14 May 2003

for the Appellants Nigel Gibbon

for the Respondents Gillian Carty, Shepherd & Wedderburn, WS

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2003.


 


DECISION

This appeal was heard on the same day as that of the Lecht Ski Company Ltd (EDN/02/162) the principles which govern the appeal of the Glenshee Company appeared to the Tribunal to be identical with that of the Lecht Company.

There were differences in the factual situation between the two, different, registered traders. The Glenshee Company is older and the Tribunal heard evidence from a Director Mr David Stuart and the Operations Manager Mr McCabe. Both these gentlemen were principally concerned with the facilities at Glenshee which consisted not only of the skiing complex but also, now, has a golf course. The way in which the rent for the land at Glenshee is arrived at is by way of royalty from the numbers involved. In the Lecht case it was a straight lease.

At Glenshee there is a poma 2 seater chairlift and the original chair lift which was locally constructed in 1960. Other means of transporting skiers were by way of 17 pomas and 4 t-bars. The company operated 2 restaurants one at Cairnwell itself and one further up the mountain at Meall Odhar. Persons could visit these cafes without purchasing a ski lift ticket.

The ticketing arrangements were similar to Lecht except that there was available a ticket which did provide transportation at the company's other site, at Glencoe.

At Glencoe the company had an access chairlift a "cliff-hanger" chairlift a beginners tow 2 t-bar tows and a button tow. Again these various devices all operated, as at the Lecht by obtaining motor power from a continuously moving cable. At Glencoe there was a restaurant at the main office the ground for which was leased from Lochaber and a plateau café which the company operated.

In each case there were opportunities for ski hire and ski school the accounting for which was capable of being separately achieved from that of its ticket price.

Both these sites operated by the Appellants had a ski patrolled area which was available for assistance of any person on the mountain side, no charge was made for that service.

Again these establishments provide local employment, in the case of Glenshee substantial local employment being 175 persons in the winter season very substantial numbers of skiers are accommodated at Glenshee and a reasonable number at Glencoe again car parking is provided. These sites also are in competition with Cairngorm Mountain Railway.

Because the mechanism of moving skiers from place A to place B is identical in its operation, if not in the precise devices with those at the Lecht for the same reasons the Tribunal dismissed the appeal and again reserve the question of expenses on the same basis.

T GORDON COUTTS, QC

CHAIRMAN

RELEASE: 27 MAY 2003

EDN/02/172