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.

The consideration for residential property did not include the grant of an annuity

By Mark McLaughlin, June 2021

The consideration given by the appellants for the purchase of a residential property was the deposit paid plus the balance of the purchase price and not (as the appellants contended) the deposit plus the grant of the annuity. 

The appellants bought a residential property. The contract price for the purchase was £765,000. The appellants paid a 5% deposit of £38,250. The contract also stated that the appellants could satisfy their obligation to pay the balance of the purchase price by granting an annuity to the vendors.  

Between contract and completion, the appellants granted the annuity. Subsequently, before completion, the vendors redeemed the annuity in return for the right to receive a lump sum of £726,750. On completion of the contract, the vendors were paid £726,750 which, together with the deposit of £38,250, came to the stated

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

Property did not comprise a mixture of residential and non-residential property
By Mark McLaughlin, May 2026
Property was entirely residential as fields were part of the grounds of the dwelling
By Mark McLaughlin, January 2025
It was not ‘reasonable in all the circumstances’ not to take corrective action
By Mark McLaughlin, July 2021
House and annexe did not count as separate dwellings for multiple dwellings relief purposes
By Mark McLaughlin, May 2021
Property and basement annex did not each count as a dwelling
By Mark McLaughlin, October 2020