The Revenue appealed from a finding at the UTTC that the taxpayer company had acted not as a principal but rather as an agent.
Held: Morgan J was wrong to criticise the FTT for looking at ‘the whole facts of the case’ as opposed to concentrating on the contractual documentation. The FTT was ‘plainly entitled’ to reach the conclusion that they did, in the light of the contractual documentation and the way in which Med conducted its business. Sir John Chadwick identified a number of aspects of the way in which Med conducted its business which he regarded as being ‘of particular weight’ in justifying the conclusion that it was a principal rather than an agent in terms of supplying hotel rooms to customers.
Judges:
Ward, McFarlane LJJ, Sir John Chadwick
Citations:
[2012] EWCA Civ 1571
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At FTTTx – Secret Hotels2 Ltd (Formerly Med Hotels Ltd) v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 15-Mar-2010
FTTTx Value Added Tax – Whether supplies of hotel and other holiday accommodation made by Appellant as agent for accommodation suppliers or as principal.
Value Added Tax – If Appellant is principal whether . .
At UTTC – Secrets Hotels2 Limited UTTC 29-Jul-2011
Value Added Tax – written agreements to provide hotel accommodation to holidaymakers – identity of supplier – was it hotel operator or company operating a bookings website – principles as to construction of written agreements – no difference because . .
Cited by:
At CA – Revenue and Customs v Secret Hotels2 Ltd SC 5-Mar-2014
The Court was asked as to: ‘the liability for Value Added Tax of a company which markets and arranges holiday accommodation through an on-line website. The outcome turns on the appropriate characterisation of the relationship between the company, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
VAT
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.466792
