Claimant v The Construction Industry Training Board — 2025

This was an appeal by Gillies and Mackay Ltd against a Construction Industry Training Board levy assessment. The company argued that it was not in scope for CITB registration and that the levy assessments for 2022 and 2023 should not have been imposed. The respondent maintained that the levy was properly applied and that the appellant’s activities fell within the construction industry regime.

The tribunal accepted that the appellant had updated its business focus over time, including ceasing the manufacture of window frames and doors and shifting towards garages, garden rooms, workshops and sheds. It held that the manufacture of timber sheds, garden rooms, workshops and garages, and the construction or erection of those structures, fell within the scope of the relevant construction orders because they were erections in the nature of buildings. The tribunal also noted that the Scope Order included joinery of any kind and defined manufacture broadly enough to include assembly or operations incidental to manufacture.

On the issue of sales, marketing, design, customer service, administration and leadership, the tribunal relied on the approach in Bobcat Plant Hire and the earlier Firthglow decision. It accepted the respondent’s submission that these functions were subsidiary to, and ancillary or related to, the appellant’s primary construction function. The tribunal found that the business existed to manufacture and erect buildings in customers’ gardens, and that without that function there would be no need for the associated non-construction activities.

The tribunal therefore concluded that the appellant’s principal activities were construction industry activities and that the remaining activities were related and ancillary to them. It held that the levy assessment had been correctly imposed and dismissed the appeal in full. No monetary remedy was awarded.