This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our privacy notice.

Property was ‘suitable for use as a dwelling’ so as to constitute ‘residential property’

By Mark McLaughlin, September 2025

The First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal did not misinterpret the requirement in the definition of the relevant stamp duty land tax legislation that to qualify as ‘residential property’ the building in question must be ‘suitable for use’ as a dwelling. 

Summary 

The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and the Upper Tribunal (UT) did not misinterpret the requirement in the definition of the relevant stamp duty land tax (SDLT) legislation (FA 2003, s 116) that to qualify as ‘residential property’ the building in question must be ‘suitable for use’ as a dwelling. 

Background 

The appellants bought a large, detached house (LG) in London and paid a higher rate of SDLT on the basis that the property was a residential property (within FA 2003, s 55(1B)). They later obtained a partial repayment of the SDLT on the basis that since the property

Subscribe to the McLaughlin’s Tax Case Library to get instant access
to the Tax Case Library.
14 day free trial , 90 day money back guarantee
Subscribe

Related or similar articles

Annexe to main house was suitable for use as a separate dwelling and multiple dwellings relief applied
By Mark McLaughlin, February 2026
Paddock was not part of the grounds of a dwelling
By Mark McLaughlin, July 2023
Main house and annex did not each count as a dwelling for multiple dwellings relief purposes
By Mark McLaughlin, October 2021
The consideration for residential property did not include the grant of an annuity
By Mark McLaughlin, June 2021
Contingent consideration: Part of the consideration for a land transaction was contingent
By Mark McLaughlin, February 2021