C.I.R. v. Adam (1928), 14 TC 34 (C.S. (1st. Div.)) -- summary under Improvements v. Repairs or Running Expense

In finding that £3,200 paid by the taxpayer (a carting contractor) in half-yearly instalments over an eight-year period for the right to deposit waste soil on the counterparty's land, were capital expenditures, Lord President Clyde stated (at p. 42) that "the provision of dumping accommodation, which was secured by means of the contract, was in the same position as the provision of premises, or any other capital asset of a relatively permanent character".