The term ‘office’ is not defined in VATA 1994. In the income tax case Edwards (HMIT) v Clinch  BTC 109, Lord Wilberforce stated at p. 111 that:
‘the word [‘office’] must involve a degree of continuance (not necessarily continuity) and of independent existence: it must connote a post to which a person can be appointed, which he can vacate and to which a successor can be appointed.’
Want to read more?
This content requires a Croner-i Tax and Accounting subscription.