Gagliardio v Director of Border Revenue: FTTTx 22 May 2014

Customs duty and VAT – whether the decision by Border Revenue not to restore goods to the owner when they had been lawfully seized at Heathrow on being presented for entry into the UK for free circulation with false documentation was a reasonable decision – Appeal dismissed

[2014]] UKFTT 498 (TC)
England and Wales

Customs and Excise

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526817

Revenue and Customs v Caithness Creels Ltd: UTTC 5 Mar 2014

CUSTOMS DUTIES – duty suspension – shipwork end-use relief – imported goods used in manufacture of lobster creels subsequently supplied for equipping fishing vessels – refusal of renewal of authorisation – whether processing of imported goods in the course of manufacture of creels excluded the goods from end-use relief – Council Regulation 2658/87/EEC, Annex I, Part One, Section II.A.1

[2014] UKUT 97 (TCC)
England and Wales

Customs and Excise

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525877

Garraway v The Director of Border Revenue: FTTTx 14 Apr 2014

EXCISE DUTY RESTORATION OF GOODS – application to strike out appeal – seizure of excise goods and vehicle not contested – appeal against refusal to restore vehicle without payment of fee – jurisdiction of the tribunal – HMRC v Jones and Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 824 applied – application granted – appeal struck out

[2014] UKFTT 365 (TC)
England and Wales

Customs and Excise

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525341

Panorama Cash and Carry Ltd (T/A Booze Direct) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Jan 2014

ECJ EXCISE DUTY – diversion of excise goods – liability of registered owner – Regulations 8 and 9 Excise Goods (Holding, Movement and Duty Point) Regulations 2010 – whether the registered owner was aware or should have been aware of the diversion – revocation of registration – whether review decision reasonable – VAT – evidence of removal from the UK – appeal against excise duty assessment allowed – appeal against review decision confirming revocation of registration allowed – appeal against VAT assessment dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 53 (TC)
England and Wales

Customs and Excise

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521729

Greencarrier Freight Services Latvia (Bibliographic Notice): ECJ 5 Dec 2013

ECJ Opinion – Customs union – Customs Code – Articles 70, 78, 221 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 – Revision of customs declarations – Partial examination of goods – Extension of audit results to identical goods included in other statements – Eligibility – verification – Can not request a further examination – Limitation period – Legal certainty

Mengozzi AG
C-571/12, [2013] EUECJ C-571/12
Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
Cited by:
OpinionGreencarrier Freight Services Latvia (Bibliographic Notice) ECJ 27-Feb-2014
ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Community Customs Code – Articles 70(1) and 78 – Customs declarations – Partial examination of goods – Sampling – Incorrect code – Application of the results to identical . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.519477

Amos, Regina (on The Application of) v Maidstone Crown Court and Another: CA 6 Nov 2013

The court was asked whether the process of condemnation and forfeiture of goods pursuant to section 139 and Schedule 3 of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 is civil or criminal in nature for the purposes of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Richards, Elias LJJ
[2013] EWCA Civ 1643
European Convention on Human Rights 6
England and Wales

Customs and Excise, Human Rights

Updated: 27 November 2021; Ref: scu.519016

Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008

The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations contained the entire regime.
Held: Criminal conduct at common law or by statute can constitute unlawful means in an unlawful means conspiracy. The protection of the Bill of Rights is available to everyone. Fraudsters and cheats are as much entitled to be protected against the levying of taxes without the authority of Parliament as anyone else. The function of an action of damages is to provide a remedy for interests that are recognised by the law as entitled to protection
‘The statute makes no provision for the recovery of VAT from someone who is not a taxable person within the meaning of section 3. There is, it may be said, a gap in the statute. But this does not mean that the Commissioners have suffered a loss for which they can sue in damages. All that can be said is that payment was made to Alldech which ought not to have been made. It is an amount that can be recovered as a debt due to the Crown from Alldech. It does not change its character as a debt due to the Crown because, when it is sought to be recovered from someone else, it is described as damages. ‘
Lord Scott said: ‘there is, in my opinion, nothing whatever in the Bill of Rights point. It is true that Total are not taxable under the statutory VAT scheme in respect of any of the pleaded transactions, but the claim against Total is not a claim for tax. It is a claim for damages, for loss, caused by the fraudulent conspiracy.’

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
[2008] UKHL 19, [2008] BPIR 699, [2008] 2 WLR 711, [2008] STI 938, [2008] 1 AC 1174, [2008] STC 644, [2008] BVC 340, [2008] BTC 5216
Bailii, HL
Value Added Tax Act 1994 1(1) 7, Bill of Rights 1688 4
England and Wales
CitedTotal Network Sl v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 31-Jan-2007
The defendants suspected a carousel VAT fraud. The defendants appealed a finding that there was a viable cause of action alleging a ‘conspiracy where the unlawful means alleged is a common law offence of cheating the public revenue’. The defendants . .
CitedGosling v Veley 1850
Wilde CJ said: ‘The rule of law that no pecuniary burden can be imposed upon the subjects of this country, by whatever name it may be called, whether tax, due, rate, or toll, except under clear and distinct legal authority, established by those who . .
CitedAttorney-General v Wilts United Dairies Ltd CA 1921
The Food Controller had been given power under the Defence of the Realm Acts to regulate milk sales. In granting the dairy a licence to buy milk in Cornwall, Devon, Dorset and Somerset, the Food Controller required the Dairy to pay 2d. per imperial . .
CitedAttorney-General v Wilts United Dairies Ltd HL 1922
The House heard an appeal by the Attorney-General against a finding that an imposition of duty on milk sales was unlawful.
Held: The appeal failed. The levy was unlawful. Lord Buckmaster said: ‘Neither of those two enactments enabled the Food . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Hambrook 1956
The Revenue claimed for loss resulting from its being deprived of the services of a taxing officer due to a vehicle accident.
Held: The action was dismissed. An action for that kind of loss did not lie where its relationship was with an . .
CitedAutologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .
CitedLonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) HL 1-Apr-1981
No General Liability in Tort for Wrongful Acts
The plaintiff had previously constructed an oil supply pipeline from Beira to Mozambique. After Rhodesia declared unilateral independence, it became a criminal offence to supply to Rhodesia without a licence. The plaintiff ceased supply as required, . .
CitedLonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) CA 6-Mar-1981
Lonrho had supplied oil to Southern Rhodesia. It gave up this profitable business when the UK imposed sanctions on that country. It claimed that Shell had conspired unlawfully to break the sanctions, thereby prolonging the illegal regime in Southern . .
CitedMarrinan v Vibart CA 1962
The court considered an action in the form an attempt to circumvent the immunity of a witness at civil law by alleging a conspiracy.
Held: The claim was rejected. The court considered the basis of the immunity from action given to witnesses. . .
CitedCrofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Company Limited v Veitch HL 15-Dec-1941
The plaintiffs sought an interdict against the respondents, a dockers’ union, who sought to impose an embargo on their tweeds as they passed through the port of Stornoway.
Held: A trade embargo was not tortious because the predominant purpose . .
CitedCrofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co Ltd v Veitch SCS 1940
Lord Justice Clerk Aitchison said: ‘When the end of a combination is not a crime or a tort in the accepted sense, and the means are not in the accepted sense criminal or tortious – cases which give rise to no difficulty – the question always is – . .
CitedAllen v Flood HL 14-Dec-1898
Tort of Malicicious Inducement not Committed
Mr Flood had in the course of his duties as a trade union official told the employers of some ironworkers that the ironworkers would go on strike, unless the employers ceased employing some woodworkers, who the ironworkers believed had worked on . .
CitedSorrell v Smith HL 1925
Torts of Conspiracy by Unlawful Means
The plaintiff had struck the first blow in a commercial battle between the parties, and the defendant then defended himself, whereupon the plaintiff sued him.
Lord Cave quoted the French saying: ‘cet animal est tres mechant; quand on . .
CitedHargreaves v Bretherton 1959
The Plaintiff pleaded that the First Defendant police officer had falsely and maliciously and without justification or excuse committed perjury at the Plaintiff’s trial on charges of criminal offences and that as a result the Plaintiff had been . .
CitedQuinn v Leathem HL 5-Aug-1901
Unlawful Means Conspiracy has two forms
Quinn was treasurer of a Belfast butchers’ association. Leathem, who traded as a butcher, employed some non-union men, although when the union made difficulties he asked for them to be admitted to the union, and offered to pay their dues. The union . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar HL 2-May-2007
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. . .
CitedSnook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd CA 1967
Sham requires common intent to create other result
The court considered a claim by a hire-purchase company for the return of a vehicle. The bailee said the agreement was a sham.
Held: The word ‘sham’ should only be used to describe an act or document where the parties have a common intention . .
CitedOptigen Ltd, Fulcrum Electronics Ltd, Bond House Systems Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 12-Jan-2006
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 2(1), Article 4(1) and (2) and Article 5(1) – Deduction of input tax – Economic activity – Taxable person acting as such – Supply of goods – Transaction forming part of a chain . .
CitedMogul Steamship Company Limited v McGregor Gow and Co QBD 10-Aug-1885
Ship owners formed themselves into an association to protect their trading interests which then caused damage to rival ship owners. The plaintiffs complained about being kept out of the conference of shipowners trading between China and London.
CitedYukong Lines Ltd v Rendsburg Investments Corporation and Others (No 2) QBD 23-Sep-1997
Repudiation by charterer: Funds were transferred by a charterer’s ‘alter ego’ to another company controlled by him with intent to defeat owner’s claim – whether ‘alter ego’ acting as undisclosed principal of charterer – whether permissible to pierce . .
CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
CitedRegina v Clarence CCCR 20-Nov-1888
The defendant knew that he had gonorrhea. He had intercourse with his wife, and infected her. She would not have consented had she known. He appealed his convictions for assault and causing grievous bodily harm.
Held: ‘The question in this . .
CitedCutler v Wandsworth Stadium Ltd HL 1949
The Act required the occupier of a licensed racetrack to take all steps necessary to secure that, so long as a totalisator was being lawfully operated on the track, there was available for bookmakers space on the track where they could conveniently . .
CitedRookes v Barnard (No 1) HL 21-Jan-1964
The court set down the conditions for the award of exemplary damages. There are two categories. The first is where there has been oppressive or arbitrary conduct by a defendant. Cases in the second category are those in which the defendant’s conduct . .
CitedDaily Mirror Newspapers Ltd v Gardner CA 1968
The Federation of Retail Newsagents decided to boycott the Daily Mirror for a week to persuade its publishers to pay higher margins, and advised them accordingly. The publishers sought an injunction saying the Federation was procuring a breach of . .
DoubtedMichaels and Michaels v Taylor Woodrow Developments Ltd, etc ChD 19-Apr-2000
The respondents sought to strike out the claim for conspiracy and failure to comply with the Act. The respondent was landlord of premises occupied by the claimants. They had served a notice under the Act of their intention to sell.
Held: The . .
CitedSurzur Overseas Ltd v Koros and others CA 25-Feb-1999
A defendant to a worldwide Mareva injunction had failed to give full disclosure of all his assets in an affidavit filed with the court. False evidence as to sale of the assets in question was later manufactured and placed before the court. The . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Goldblatt 1972
In a winding up case, the Commissioners can if necessary proceed against a receiver for misfeasance. . .
CitedEx parte Island Records CA 1978
An injunction is available to any person who can show that a private right or interest has been interfered with by a criminal act. . .
CitedRCA Corporation v Pollard CA 1982
The illegal activities of bootleggers who had made unauthorised recordings of concerts, diminished the profitability of contracts granting to the plaintiffs the exclusive right to exploit recordings by Elvis Presley.
Held: The defendant’s . .
CitedW T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
CitedOren, Tiny Love Limited v Red Box Toy Factory Limited, Red Box Toy (UK) Limited, Index Limited, Martin Yaffe International Limited, Argos Distributors Limited PatC 1-Feb-1999
One plaintiff was the exclusive licensee of a registered design. The defendant sold articles alleged to infringe the design right. The registered owner had a statutory right to sue for infringement. But the question was whether the licensee could . .
CitedRegina v Mavji CACD 1987
The court considered the offence of cheating the public revenue.
Held: Cheating might include any form of fraudulent conduct which resulted in diverting money from the revenue and depriving the revenue of money to which it was entitled. . .
CitedMetall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 1990
There was a complicated commercial dispute involving allegations of conspiracy. A claim by the plaintiffs for inducing or procuring a breach of contract would have been statute-barred in New York.
Held: Slade LJ said: ‘The judge’s approach to . .
CitedRex v Bainbridge 1782
. .
CitedRegina v Hudson 1956
To avoid the payment of tax by positive false representations constitutes a fraud on the Crown and a fraud on the public. It is a common law offence and is indictable as such. . .
CitedWoolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2) HL 20-Jul-1992
The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. It paid money on account of the tax demanded. It won and recovered the sums paid, but the revenue refused to pay any interest accrued on the sums paid. . .
CitedDeutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another HL 25-Oct-2006
The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred.
Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when . .
CitedCommissioners of Customs and Excise, Attorney General v Federation of Technological Industries and Others ECJ 11-May-2006
ECJ (Taxation) C-197/03 Sixth VAT Directive – Articles 21(3) and 22(8) – National measures to combat fraud – Joint and several liability for the payment of VAT – Provision of security for VAT payable by another . .
CitedHenderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd HL 25-Jul-1994
Lloyds Agents Owe Care Duty to Member; no Contract
Managing agents conducted the financial affairs of the Lloyds Names belonging to the syndicates under their charge. It was alleged that they managed these affairs with a lack of due careleading to enormous losses.
Held: The assumption of . .
CitedMarcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited HL 4-Dec-2003
The claimant’s house was regularly flooded by waters including also foul sewage from the respondent’s neighbouring premises. He sought damages and an injunction. The defendants sought to restrict the claimant to his statutory rights.
Held: The . .
CitedJohnson v Unisys Ltd HL 23-Mar-2001
The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to him under the Employment Rights Act 1996 through the Employment Tribunal system.
Held: The statutory system for compensation for unfair . .
CitedShiloh Spinners Ltd v Harding HL 13-Dec-1972
A right of re-entry had been reserved in the lease on the assignment (and not on the initial grant) of a term of years in order to reinforce covenants (to support, fence and repair) which were taken for the benefit of other retained land of the . .
CitedMacNiven (Inspector of Taxes) v Westmoreland Investments Ltd HL 15-Feb-2001
The fact that a payment of interest was made only to create a tax advantage did not prevent its being properly claimed. Interest was paid for the purposes of setting it against tax, when the debt was discharged. A company with substantial losses had . .

Cited by:
CitedChild Poverty Action Group, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Work and Pensions CA 14-Oct-2009
CPAG appealed against a refusal of a declaration that the respondent could use only the 1992 Act to recover overpayment of benefits where there had been neither misrepresentation nor non-disclosure.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and the court . .
CitedDigicel (St Lucia) Ltd and Others v Cable and Wireless Plc and Others ChD 15-Apr-2010
The claimants alleged breaches of legislation by members of the group of companies named as defendants giving rise to claims in conspiracy to injure by unlawful means. In effect they had been denied the opportunity to make interconnections with . .
CitedMobilx Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs; Blue Sphere Global Ltd v Same and similar CA 12-May-2010
Each company sought repayment of input VAT. HMRC refused, saying that the transactions were the end-product of a fraud on it, and that even if the taxpayer did not know that a fraud was involved, it should have been aware that one was and acted . .
CitedThe Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 8-Dec-2010
The Action Group had obtained a declaration that, where an overpayment of benefits had arisen due to a miscalculation by the officers of the Department, any process of recovering the overpayment must be by the Act, and that the Department could not . .
AppliedThe Racing Partnership Ltd and Others v Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Ltd and Others ChD 8-May-2019
Actions concerning the alleged infringement of the claimants’ rights in respect of data relating to horseracing. The claimant had provided horse race betting odds (Betting shows) to race course owners. A rival company had provided similar data to . .
CitedThe Racing Partnership Ltd and Others v Sports Information Services Ltd CA 9-Oct-2020
The court looked at the limitations: (1) the legal protection of sports data and other information which is not subject to traditional intellectual property rights; (2) the scope of an action under the equitable doctrine of breach of confidence or . .
CitedJSC BTA Bank v Khrapunov SC 21-Mar-2018
A had been chairman of the claimant bank. After removal, A fled to the UK, obtaining asylum. The bank then claimed embezzlement, and was sentenced for contempt after failing to disclose assets when ordered, but fled the UK. The Appellant, K, was A’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Torts – Other, Customs and Excise, Constitutional

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.266167

Marwaha v UK Border Revenue Agency (Cash and Compensation Team): Admn 2 Nov 2017

Flower Arrangers’ poppy straws not controlled

The court was asked whether the definition of poppy straw in the 1971 Act applied to poppy head and poppy heads and stalks imported by the Appellant for use in flower arrangements.
Held: On the correct interpretation of the statutory definition of poppy straw the two consignments in issue did not comprise poppy straw because the relevant poppies had not been mown and so the relevant poppy heads (with and without stalks) were not parts of the poppy after mowing. Rather, they had been harvested or picked with care in a way that preserved those heads for use for ornamental or decorative purpose, including floristry.

Charles J
[2017] EWHC 2321 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 727
Bailii, WLRD
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
England and Wales

Customs and Excise, Crime

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.599411

Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners: HL 26 Jun 1973

Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist

The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their patents.
Held: Disclosure should be ordered. If someone, even innocently became involved in tortious acts committed by third parties, he became under a duty assist in discovery of the identity of the third party wrongdoers. How the information was acquired was not relevant. Duties of confidence owed by taxation authorities could be overborne if necessary.
Lord Reid said: ‘So discovery to find the identity of a wrongdoer is available against anyone against whom the plaintiff has a cause of action in relation to the same wrong. It is not available against a person who has no other connection with the wrong than that he was a spectator or has some document relating to it in his possession. But the respondents are in an intermediate position. Their conduct was entirely innocent; it was in execution of their statutory duty. But without certain action on their part the infringements could never have been committed. Does this involvement in the matter make a difference?’ to which he answered ‘Yes’.
Referring to the authorities, he said: ‘They seem to me to point to a very reasonable principle that if through no fault of his own a person gets mixed up in the tortious acts of others so as to facilitate their wrongdoing he may incur no personal liability but he comes under a duty to assist the person who has been wronged by giving him full information and disclosing the identity of the wrongdoers. I do not think that it matters whether he became so mixed up by voluntary action on his part or because it was his duty to do what he did. It may be that if this causes him expense the person seeking the information ought to reimburse him. But justice requires that he should co-operate in righting the wrong if he unwittingly facilitated its perpetration.
I am the more inclined to reach this result because it is clear that if the person mixed up in the affair has to any extent incurred any liability to the person wronged, he must make full disclosure even though the person wronged has no intention of proceeding against him. It would I think be quite illogical to make his obligation to disclose the identity of the real offenders depend on whether or not he has himself incurred some minor liability. I would therefore hold that the respondents must disclose the information now sought unless there is some consideration of public policy which prevents that.’
Lord Kilbrandon: ‘There is no suggestion that in so doing he is pretending to exercise any right of relief against the discoverers.
In my opinion, accordingly, the respondents, in consequence of the relationship in which they stand, arising out of their statutory functions, to the goods imported, can properly be ordered by the court to disclose to the appellants the names of persons whom the appellants bona fide believe to be infringing these rights, this being their only practicable source of information as to whom they should sue, subject to any special right of exception which the respondents may qualify in respect of their position as a department of state. It has to be conceded that there is no direct precedent for the granting of such an application in the precise circumstances of this case, but such an exercise of the power of the court seems to be well within broad principles authoritatively laid down. That exercise will always be subject to judicial discretion, and it may well be that the reason for the limitation in practice on what may be a wider power to order discovery, to any case in which the defendant has been ‘mixed up with the transaction’, to use Lord Romilly’s words, or ‘stands in some relation’ to the goods, within the meaning of the decision in Post v Toledo, Cincinnati and St Louis Railroad Co (1887) 11 NERep 540, is that that is the way in which judicial discretion ought to be exercised.’
Viscount Dilhorne referred to the antiquity of the mere witness rule and considered the principle of whether disclosure could be ordered in the case before him: ‘discovery can be granted against a person who is not a mere witness to discover, the fact of some wrongdoing being established, who was responsible for it. The ‘mere witness’ rule has lost a great deal of its importance since the Common Law Procedure Act removed the bar to persons interested giving evidence, but it still has significance. Someone involved in the transaction is not a mere witness. If he could be sued, even though there be no intention of suing him, he is not a mere witness . . Are the respondents to be regarded as so involved in this case? I think the answer is yes.’

Lord Reid, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Cross of Chelsea and Lord Kilbrandon
[1974] AC 133, [1973] 3 WLR 164, [1973] 2 All ER 943, [1973] UKHL 6, [1974] RPC 101, [1973] FSR 365
lip, Bailii
England and Wales
AppliedPost v Toledo, Cincinnati and St Louis Railroad Co 1887
Powers of discovery where third party is involved in some way in the matters underlying the issue. . .
AppliedOrr v Diaper 1876
The plaintiff had a cause of action against the defendant and sought discovery of the name of a third party known to the defendant so that that third party could be joined in. ‘In this case the Plaintiffs do not know, and cannot discover, who the . .
AppliedUpmann v Elkan CA 5-Jun-1871
The defendant freight forwarding agent was innocently in possession of consignments of counterfeit cigars in transit to Germany through a London dock. The action was not for discovery, but for an order restraining the forwarder from releasing the . .
At First InstanceNorwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners ChD 1972
The court considered an application for an order that the other party identify third party wrong-doers. . .
Appeal from (reversed)Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 2-Jan-1972
The plaintiffs sought discovery of the names of patent infringers from the defendant third party, submitting that by analogy with trade mark and passing-off cases, the Customs could be ordered to give discovery of the names.
Held: Buckley LJ . .

Cited by:
CitedCamelot Group plc v Centaur Communications Limited CA 23-Oct-1997
An order for a journalist to disclose the name of an employee disclosing his employer’s information, may be made where there was a need to identify a disloyal employee. Here drafts of accounts had been released to embarrass the company. The . .
CitedTotalise Plc v The Motley Fool Limited and Interative Investor Limited (2) CA 19-Dec-2001
The respondent operated a web site which contained a chat room. Defamatory remarks were made by a third party through the chat room, and the claimant sought details of the identity of the poster. The respondent refused to do so without a court . .
CitedAustralia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd v National Westminster Bank plc and Others ChD 6-Feb-2002
Where an innocent party had been joined in an action in order to ensure proper discovery, he should be excused from the action once he had complied with the discovery required. It would be wrong to continue his involvement against an unsupported . .
CitedFinancial Times Ltd and others v Interbrew SA CA 8-Mar-2002
The appellants appealed against orders for delivery up of papers belonging to the claimant. The paper was a market sensitive report which had been stolen and doctored before being handed to the appellant.
Held: The Ashworth Hospital case . .
AppliedAshworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited HL 27-Jun-2002
Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources
The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have . .
CitedArsenal Football Club plc and Others v Elte Sports Distribution Ltd ChD 10-Dec-2002
The claimant alleged that the respondent had unlawfully made use of photographs of its footballers in a calendar. The respondent asked the court to strike out the claim as merely speculative, and the claimant sought pre-action disclosure.
CitedBritish Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd HL 7-May-1980
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
FollowedLoose v Williamson 1978
. .
FollowedRCA Corporation v Reddingtons Rare Records 1974
Interlocutory relief on the basis of the Norwich Pharmacal principle could be ordered, for example, on motion. . .
CitedBritish Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd CA 7-May-1980
Lord Denning MR said that the Norwich Pharmacal case opened ‘a new chapter in our law’ and ‘Mr Irvine suggested this was limited to cases where the injured person desired to sue the wrongdoer. I see no reason why it should be so limited. The same . .
CitedP v T Limited 1997
The jurisdiction under Norwich Pharmacal is not confined to circumstances where there has been tortious wrongdoing and is now available where there has been contractual wrongdoing. . .
CitedCarlton Film Distributors Ltd v VCI Plc 2003
. .
CitedMitsui and Co Ltd v Nexen Petroleum UK Ltd ChD 29-Apr-2005
Mitsui sought disclosure of documents from a third party under the rules in Norwich Pharmacal.
Held: Such relief was available ‘where the claimant requires the disclosure of crucial information in order to be able to bring its claim or where . .
CitedCHC Software Care v Hopkins and Wood 1993
The jurisdiction to require discovery of documents from a third party is not restricted to seeking information from an innocent third party. The third party may himself be one of the wrongdoers. . .
CitedAoot Kalmneft v Denton Wilde Sapte (A Firm) Merc 29-Oct-2001
The court ordered relief by way of disclosure against a third party: ‘In Norwich Pharmacal the information required was the identity of the wrongdoer (the applicant knew what wrong had been done but not who had done it) but I see no reason why the . .
CitedMersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd QBD 7-Feb-2006
The trust, operators of Ashworth Secure Hospital sought from the defendant journalist disclosure of the name of their employee who had revealed to the defendant matters about the holding of Ian Brady, the Moors Murderer, and in particular medical . .
CitedMicrosoft Corporation v Ling and others ChD 3-Jul-2006
The claimant sought damages against the respondent for various infringements in sales of unlicensed products, and also additional damages. The defendant argued that Microsoft’s licensing arrangements acted anti-competively.
Held: ‘the . .
CitedHughes v Carratu International Plc QBD 19-Jul-2006
The claimant wished to bring an action against the defendant enquiry agent, saying that it had obtained unlawful access to details of his bank accounts, and now sought disclosure of documents. The defendant denied wrongdoing, and said it had . .
CitedMersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd CA 21-Feb-2007
The defendant journalist had published confidential material obtained from the claimant’s secure hospital at Ashworth. The hospital now appealed against the refusal of an order for him to to disclose his source.
Held: The appeal failed. Given . .
CitedDobson and Dobson v North Tyneside Health Authority and Newcastle Health Authority CA 26-Jun-1996
A post mortem had been carried out by the defendants. The claimants, her grandmother and child sought damages after it was discovered that not all body parts had been returned for burial, some being retained instead for medical research. They now . .
CitedSheffield Wednesday Football Club Ltd and others v Hargreaves QBD 18-Oct-2007
The defendant operated a web forum in which posters posted defamatory messages about the claimants. The claimants sought an order disclosing the contact details of the members of the forum. The owner of the forum said he had undertaken not to . .
CitedSmith v ADVFN Plc QBD 13-Mar-2008
Order re case management application. The claimant said he had been defamed on an internet forum run by the defendants, and sought orders for disclosure of the identities of the posters to the website. The operator said that special software might . .
CitedSmith v ADVFN Plc CA 15-Apr-2008
The claimant complained of defamation on internet bulletin boards. He made an application to require the forum operator to disclose IP addresses and other information about posters under a Norwich Pharmacal order. Further applications were made for . .
CitedSmith v ADVFN Plc and others QBD 25-Jul-2008
The claimant had brought multiple actions in defamation against anonymous posters on an online forum. The claimant sought to lift the stay which had been imposed because of the number of actions. The claimant had not yet paid outstanding costs . .
CitedMohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 1) Admn 21-Aug-2008
The claimant had been detained by the US in Guantanamo Bay suspected of terrorist involvement. He sought to support his defence documents from the respondent which showed that the evidence to be relied on in the US courts had been obtained by . .
CitedBanker’s Trust v Shapira CA 1980
Enforcement through innocent third party bank
Two forged cheques, each for USD500,000, had been presented by two men and as a result USD1,000,000 had been transferred to accounts in their names. The plaintiff sought to trace assets through the banks involved.
Held: The court approved the . .
CitedArab Monetary Fund v Hashim and On (No.5) 1992
The rule in Norwich Pharmacal does not provide a general right of discovery. Hoffman J cited Lord Reid in Norwich Pharmacal and said: ‘The reference to ‘full information’ has sometimes led to an assumption that any person who has become mixed up in . .
CitedMohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
CitedFinancial Times Ltd and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Dec-2009
The claimants said that an order that they deliver up documents leaked to them regarding a possible takeover violated their right to freedom of expression. They complained that such disclosure might lead to the identification of journalistic . .
CitedUnited Company Rusal Plc and Others v HSBC Bank Plc and Others QBD 1-Mar-2011
The claimants sought an order for discovery here from a third party of documents required to support proposed litigation in Russia.
Held: Tugendhat J said: ‘the court [has] to be as satisfied as it can be, having regard to the limitations . .
CitedThe Rugby Football Union v Viagogo Ltd QBD 30-Mar-2011
The claimant objected to the resale through the defendant of tickets to matches held at the Twickenham Stadium. The tickets contained terms disallowing resales at prices over the face value. They sought orders for the disclosure of the names of the . .
CitedThe President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Bank of Scotland International PC 27-Feb-2006
(Guernsey) Lord Bingham said: ‘Norwich Pharmacal relief exists to assist those who have been wronged but do not know by whom. If they have straight forward and available means of finding out, then it will not be reasonable to achieve that end by . .
CitedMedia Cat Ltd v Adams and Others PCC 18-Apr-2011
The claimants had begun copyright infringement cases. Having been refused a request to be allowed to withdraw the cases as an abuse, their solicitors now faced an application for a wasted costs order.
Held: The court only has jurisdiction to . .
CitedBritish Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills Admn 20-Apr-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of legislative provisions requiring Internet Service Providers to become involved in regulation of copyright infringements by its subscribers. They asserted that the Act and proposed Order were contrary to . .
CitedThe Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd SC 21-Nov-2012
The Union challenged the right of the respondent to resell tickets to international rugby matches. The tickets were subject to a condition rendering it void on any resale at above face value. They said that the respondent had advertised tickets in . .
CitedVarious Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others ChD 12-Jul-2013
The claimants sought disclosure by the police of information relating to the phone hacking activities said to have been conducted by journalists engaged by the first defendant newspaper. They were wanting to make claims against the respondent, but . .
CitedCartier International Ag and Others v British Telecommunications Plc and Another SC 13-Jun-2018
The respondent ISP companies had been injuncted to stop the transmission of websites which infringed the trade mark rights of the claimants. The ISPs now appealed from the element of the order that they pay the claimants’ costs of implementing the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Information, Customs and Excise

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.174124

Barnes (As Former Court Appointed Receiver) v The Eastenders Group and Another: SC 8 May 2014

Costs of Wrongly Appointed Receiver

‘The contest in this case is about who should bear the costs and expenses of a receiver appointed under an order which ought not to have been made. The appellant, who is a former partner in a well known firm of accountants, was appointed to act as management receiver of the assets of a group of companies referred to as Eastenders on the application of CPS. The order was made under section 48 of the 2002 Act but was quashed on appeal.’
Held: The Receiver’s appeal against the refusal of the court to order payment by CPS succeeded.
At common law, a receiver was entitled to his costs from the estate under receivership, howver the issue here was as to whether the order was proportionate in this case under A1P1. The taking of property without compensation is, in general, a disproportionate interference with A1. In this case the company was not a defendant, and nor were the assets those of the defendant.
The Receiver having acted under appointent of and by agreement with the CPS, they were responsible.

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson
[2014] UKSC 26, [2014] WLR(D) 194, [2014] 2 WLR 1269, UKSC 2013/0006
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC Summary, SC
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, European Convention on Human Rights P1 A1
England and Wales
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Another v Revenue and Customs Admn 4-Nov-2010
Applications for judicial review in relation to alcoholic goods detained by the Defendants on grounds of a suspicion that duty may not have been paid in respect of them.
Sales J said: ‘In my view, there is a clear reason why Parliament wished . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 29-Dec-2010
FTTTx Excise Duty – warehouse – application for registration as an owner of goods under Warehousekeepers and Owners of Goods Regulations 1999 (‘WOWGR’) – whether decision of HMRC could reasonably have been . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc v South Western Magistrates’ Court Admn 22-Mar-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of decisions by the magistrates first to issue search warrants, and then to refuse to disclose the information on which it had been based.
Held: The documentation now having been disclosed the second part of . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 20-Jan-2012
The Court considered the lawfulness of the exercise of the power claimed by the Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise (HMRC) to detain goods temporarily for the purpose of investigating their status. . .
See alsoFirst Stop Wholesale Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 27-Mar-2012
The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant’s decisions to seize and detain alcoholic drinks from his business premises.
Held: Goods could not lawfully be detained under section 139(1) for the purpose of ascertaining whether the power . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 27-Mar-2012
FTTTx Procedure – costs – application for costs out of time – whether discretion to entertain an application should be exercised – Rule 5 (3) (a) Tribunal Rules 2009 – whether direction should be made to apply . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Another v HM Revenue and Customs CA 22-May-2012
The appellants had succeeded in resisting proceedings commenced by the respondents for the seizure of goods. The respondent now argued that costs should not follow the event, asserting a statutory bar. The appellant additionally argued that any such . .
See AlsoFirst Stop Wholesale Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 16-Jul-2012
The applicant challenged the court’s refusal to pay its costs after a finding that the seizure of goods by the respondent had been unlawful. The defendant argued that section 144 of the 1979 Act protected it against such an order.
Held: . .
See AlsoFirst Stop Wholesale Ltd R (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 5-Oct-2012
Claim for judicial review of various seizure notices issued by the defendants. The question was whether a statement in the notices that ‘no evidence of UK duty payment has been provided’ was a sufficient statement of the grounds for seizing the . .
See AlsoCrown Prosecution Service v The Eastenders Group and Another CACD 23-Nov-2012
‘application by the CPS for permission to appeal against . . orders made . . in the Central Criminal Court on 8 May 2012. I use the expression ‘in form’ because as will appear there are issues as to the jurisdiction of the court. The case raises . .
CitedHM Revenue and Customs v First Stop Wholesale Ltd and Another CA 12-Mar-2013
‘Appeals . . against orders . . arising out of the detention . . by HMRC of large quantities of alcohol from the warehouse and other premises of First Stop, the respondent to the first two appeals and the appellant in the third. At the time the . .
CitedCapewell v Commissioners for HM Customs and Excise and Sinclair CA 2-Dec-2004
The court approved guidelines for the appointment and remuneration of a receiver appointed under the 1988 Act. . .
CitedCapewell v Revenue and Customs and Another HL 31-Jan-2007
The defendant appealed against an order regarding the remuneration of a receiver appointed to administer a restraint order placed on the assets of the defendant under the 1988 Act on the basis of an allegation that the defendant had been involved in . .
CitedFibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd HL 15-Jun-1942
A contract for the supply by the respondents of special machinery to be manufactured by them was treated as an ordinary contract for the sale of goods. It began valid, but suffered frustration by the outbreak of war.
Held: Lord Wright restated . .
CitedSporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden ECHR 23-Sep-1982
Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim
(Plenary Court) The claimants challenged orders expropriating their properties for redevelopment, and the banning of construction pending redevelopment. The orders remained in place for many years.
Held: Article 1 comprises three distinct . .
CitedJames and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
CitedRaimondo v Italy ECHR 22-Feb-1994
The applicant was arrested and placed under house arrest on charges relating to his association with the Mafia. As an interim measure some of his property was seized. The proceedings ended in his acquittal. He claimed that the seizure of his . .
CitedBenham v United Kingdom ECHR 8-Feb-1995
Legal Aid was wrongfully refused where a tax or fine defaulter was liable to imprisonment, and the lack of a proper means enquiry, made imprisonment of poll tax defaulter unlawful. A poll tax defaulter had been wrongly committed to prison by . .
CitedIn Re Andrews CA 25-Feb-1999
The defendant and his son had been charged with offences relating to their joint business, and restraint orders were made. The son was convicted, but the defendant was acquitted and awarded his costs out of central funds. The taxing officer held . .
CitedRoxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd 6-Dec-2001
High Court of Australia – Rothmans were licensed to act as wholesalers of tobacco products under a New South Wales statute. They sold products to retailers for a price including licence fees, which were in reality a form of indirect taxation, . .
CitedHughes and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise etc CA 20-May-2002
N was charged with VAT fraud. He was the joint owner of a company with his brother T each holding 50% of the shares. T was never charged. A restraint and receivership order was made against N, preventing the company from dealing in any way with its . .
CitedCrown Prosecution Service v Compton, Comptons of Brighton Limited, Coyne, Compton CA 27-Nov-2002
Appeal against refusal of restraint order.
Held: It is enough that on the documents a good arguable case arises for treating the relevant assets as the realisable property of the defendant.
Lord Justice Simon Brown said: ‘All that I . .
CitedFrizen v Russia ECHR 24-Mar-2005
Violation of P1-1. A confiscation order made by a Russian criminal court was unlawful and involved a violation of the applicant’s rights under A1P1. The husband was convicted of fraud. She was not herself charged with any criminal offence. After his . .
CitedStanford International Bank Ltd, Re CA 25-Feb-2010
Hughes LJ said: ‘it is essential that the duty of candour laid upon any applicant for an order without notice is fully understood and complied with. It is not limited to a duty not to misrepresent. It consists in a duty to consider what any other . .
CitedSinclair In her Capacity As the Former Receiver v Glatt Executors of Estate of Glatt and Glatt and Glatt CA 13-Mar-2009
The court considered the recovery of expenses by a receiver appointed to administer assets of money launderer. The receiver sought to exercise a lien over assets held for the prisoner by the prison to recover the costs of the receivership after the . .

Cited by:
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 11-Jun-2014
Alcoholic drinks had been seized by the respondents pending further enquiries with a view to a possible forfeiture, then held and returned but only under court order. The company had complained that the detention of the goods was unlawful. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise, Costs, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.524663

TNT (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 10 Jan 2011

FTTTx CUSTOMS DUTY – importation of goods and their entry by the Appellant under the simplified inward processing relief procedure (SIPR) – declarations contained inaccurate information and there was a failure to comply with all the obligations relating to the entry of the goods under the SIPR – a customs debt on importation incurred pursuant to article 204(1) of the Community Customs Code Regulation 2913/92/EEC – a finding that the inaccurate information included in the declarations resulted from an attempted fraud by a person or persons unknown importing the goods and using the Appellant’s services to make the declarations – whether the Appellant was the debtor in relation to that customs debt – the circumstances to be considered in identifying the debtor in accordance with article 204(3) included the circumstance that the Appellant stated that it was acting in the name of or on behalf of another person without being empowered to do so – in consequence the Appellant was to be deemed to have acted in its own name and on its own behalf pursuant to article 5(4) – therefore the Appellant was the person who was required, according to the circumstances, to fulfil the relevant obligations and to comply with the relevant conditions and was the debtor in relation to the customs debt pursuant to article 204(3) – appeal dismissed

John Walters QC
[2011] UKFTT 38 (TC)
England and Wales

Customs and Excise

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.442841

Infinis Energy Holdings Ltd v HM Treasury and Another: CA 21 Oct 2016

No breach of EU Legitimate Expectation

The appellant challenged rejection of its request for judicial review of a decision to remove financial support for its creation pf renewable energy.
Held: The appal failed. Althought eth claimant would indeed be severely affected, it had taken no particular decision based upon any representation from te respondent which might have created a proper expectation. There had been no breach of European law principle of law as to forseeability, certainty of legitimate expectation.

Sir Terence Etherton MR, Lloyd Jones, Sales LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1030, [2016] WLR(D) 549, [2017] QB 1221, [2016] STI 2777, [2017] STC 414, [2017] 2 CMLR 12, [2017] 2 WLR 194
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Appeal fromDrax Power Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Hm Treasury and Others Admn 10-Feb-2016
The claimant sought to challenge the removal of the exemption for renewable source electricity from the Climate Change Levy.
Held: Review was refused. The court rejected the Respondents’ submission that EU law has no application to the RSE . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Utilities, Customs and Excise

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.570364

Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel v Commission: ECFI 23 Apr 2018

ECJ Dumping – Imports of Steel Products Originating In China and Taiwan – Judgment – Dumping – Imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products originating in China and Taiwan – Definitive anti-dumping duty – Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 – Article 2(7)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (now Article 2(7)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036) – Normal value – Selection of the appropriate third country – Adjustments – Article 2(10)(k) of Regulation No 1225/2009 (now Article 2(10)(k) of Regulation 2016/1036) – Calculation of the dumping margin – Adjustments – Article 3(2), (6) and (7) of Regulation No 1225/2009 (now Article 3(2), (6) and (7) of Regulation 2016/1036) – Injury – Causal link

ECLI:EU:T:2018:209, [2018] EUECJ T-675/15

Customs and Excise

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.609328

Chaudhry v Revenue and Customs Commissioners: Admn 17 Jul 2007

The commissioners had served a notice on the taxpayer requiring him to pay security for his tax liabiities. He appealed out of time against the finding, and was prosecuted for having continued to trade without providing the security. He appealed.
Held: The appeal failed. The legislation made no provision for suspension of the requirement not to trade. A leaflet from the commissioners might have created a legitimate expectation that the trader could continue pending a proper appeal, but no such expectation was created where, as here, the appeal was lodged out of time.
Sedley LJ, Nelson J
Times 02-Aug-2007, [2007] EWHC 1805 (Admin)
Value Added Tax Act 1994 72(11), Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 171(4)
England and Wales

Updated: 12 September 2021; Ref: scu.258526

Solarworld v Brandoni Solare and Solaria Energia Y Medio Ambiente: ECJ 9 Nov 2017

Subsidies : Judgment – Appeal – Subsidies – Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013 – Article 2 – Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from China – Definitive countervailing duty – Exemption of imports covered by an accepted undertaking – Severability
C-205/16, [2017] EUECJ C-205/16

Updated: 25 August 2021; Ref: scu.599687

Denley v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Aug 2017

Excise Duties
[2017] UKUT 340 (TCC)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedJP Whitter (Water Well Engineers) Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 13-Jun-2018
The taxpayers registration under the Construction Industry Scheme had been withdrawn. The Court was now asked whether HMRC are obliged, or at least entitled, to take into account the impact on the taxpayer’s business of the cancellation of its . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 July 2021; Ref: scu.595593

The Scotch Whisky Association and Others, Re Judicial Review: SCS 3 May 2013

(Outer House, Court of Session) The petitioners challenged the legality of an enactment of the Scottish Parliament – the Act. They also challenged the legality of the Scottish Ministers’ decision that they would make an Order setting the minimum price at 50 pence per unit of alcohol.
Held: The claim was rejected
Lord Doherty
[2013] ScotCS CSOH – 70, 2013 SLT 776
Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012
See AlsoThe Scotch Whisky Association and Others, Re Judicial Review SCS 26-Sep-2012
Outer House – application by Alcohol Focus Scotland for permission to intervene in the public interest in a judicial review application by The Scotch Whisky Association and two European bodies which represent producers of spirit drinks and the wine . .

Cited by:
See AlsoScotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SCS 30-Apr-2014
(Extra Division, Inner House, Court of Session) Reclaiming motion is brought against the Lord Ordinary’s decision rejecting the petitioners’ challenge to the provisions of the 2012 Act. Reference to ECJ . .
See AlsoScotch Whisky Association and Others for Judicial Review SCS 11-Jul-2014
Extra Division, Inner House – Further application for leave to intervene. . .
See AlsoScotch Whisky Association And Others v Lord Advocate, Advocate General for Scotland ECJ 23-Dec-2015
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common organisation of the markets in agricultural products – Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 – Free movement of goods – Article 34 TFEU – Quantitative . .
See alsoThe Scotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SCS 21-Oct-2016
The Association sought to challenge the legality of the 2012 Act and orders made under it. The Government’s contended that the Act would bring health benefits of one sort or another to at least part of the population.
Held: In a reclaiming . .
See AlsoScotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SC 15-Nov-2017
The Association challenged the imposition of minimum pricing systems for alcohol, saying that it was in breach of European law. After a reference to the ECJ, the Court now considered its legality.
Held: The Association’s appeal failed. Minimum . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 May 2021; Ref: scu.495201

Skillbond Direct Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Aug 2012

Customs Duty – Import of product from Liechtenstein – Supplier’s invoice indicated that the nil preferential rate of duty was appropriate to the goods – Invoice constituting the ‘proof of origin’ – Failure by the forwarding agent to indicate on the ‘simplified’ electronic filing details submitted to HMRC that preference was available such that duty was in fact paid – four month period for which the proof of origin remained valid – whether the entry of the goods for customs purposes (albeit incorrectly) enabled it to be said that the proof of origin had been submitted within the four-month period – Whether a repayment claim could be made under Article 236 of the Customs Code, or whether the liberty of HMRC to amend incorrect declarations under Article 78, possibly coupled with a claim under Article 236 nevertheless enabled the Appellant to recover duty unnecessarily paid in the periods more than four months prior to the actual late submission of the proofs of origin – Appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 488 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 23 April 2021; Ref: scu.466128

Dennett v Director of Border Revenue and Another: FTTTx 14 Jun 2012

EXCISE DUTY – Vehicle seized and condemned as liable to forfeiture under CMA – restoration appeal – Tribunal confined to considering the reasonableness of UKBA’s decision to refuse restoration following HMRC v Jones and Jones – whether exceptional circumstances existed which rendered that decision unreasonable – held there were none – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 395 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462794

Fernando v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Jun 2012

EXCISE DUTY – Restoration appeal – excise goods (alcohol) purchased from a cash and carry in the UK and found in a vehicle transporting them within the UK – whether the decision not to offer the vehicle for restoration was unreasonable – held on the facts it was not – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 394 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462797

Butlers Ship Stores Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Jun 2012

EXCISE DUTY – disappearance of goods; excise duty point; tax warehouse; assessment on consignor; carrier and owner of goods; validity of assessments; joint and several liability; abnormal and unforeseeable circumstances; force majeure; whether supervening principles of European Law of proportionality and/or legal certainty rendered assessments invalid; Council Directive 92/12/EEC, Arts. 13, 14, 15 and 20; validity of Regulation 7 of the Excise Duty Points (Duty Suspended Movements of Excise Goods) Regulations 2001
[2012] UKFTT 371 (TC)
Excise Duty Points (Duty Suspended Movements of Excise Goods) Regulations 2001
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462782

Gateway Shipping Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 May 2012

FTTTx CUSTOMS DUTY – Hardship – Duty or security pending appeal – Post-Clearance demand- Appellant the declarant – Joint and several liability for debt – Appellant’s Customer successful in appeal against demand by HMRC – Whether payment by Appellant to HMRC would cause irreparable damage or serious economic damage – Relevance of dividends paid to controlling shareholders – Relevance of Tribunal decision in favour of customer – FA 1994 s.16(3) – Community Customs Code (Reg (EEC) 92/2913) Act 244 – Appeals entertained
[2012] UKFTT 328 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462739

GB Seed Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 May 2012

FTTTz Customs Duty – Post clearance demand notice – Whether waiver of notice – No – Whether correct customs information provided – No – Whether importer liable to pay import duty and for accuracy of presented documents – Yes – Burden of proof not discharged – Appeal Dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 343 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462740

Regina v Okafor: CACD 10 Nov 1993

The appellant, a Nigerian national, arrived at Gatwick Airport from Nigeria with a single item of luggage, namely a suit carrier. He was asked a number of questions, in particular whether he had packed the luggage himself and whether everything in it belonged to him, following which his luggage was searched. Packages of cocaine were discovered in his luggage but he was not arrested or informed of what had been found, the officer wishing him to be released in order to see whether he would lead customs officers to anybody else involved in the importation. He agreed to undergo a body search. Whilst this was in progress (and other officers being deployed by way of surveillance) he was asked various questions and gave various answers without being cautioned or advised of his entitlement to have legal advice before being interviewed. Objection was taken at trial to the admission in evidence of the conversation during the body search.
Held: Customs officers are subject to the PACE Code of Practice for Detention etc in the same as are the police, and must issue a formal caution before questioning a suspect. ‘We have come to the conclusion that the learned judge ought to have excluded this conversation. There were clear breaches of the rules and breaches which were of significance in the context of this case. Therefore we conclude, because it seems that this matter has been ventilated by Mr Issard-Davies with a view to future conduct by the Customs and Excise, that where a Customs Officer has reason to suspect that an offence has been committed, he must either avoid asking questions in relation to the offence, or he must follow the provisions of the Code and administer a caution. In the circumstances of the present case it would have been an option for the Customs Officer to talk about anything other than the case whilst conducting the search, and to have allowed the suspect to go into the concourse and then ask him questions only when he was ultimately arrested. In that way the object of trying to catch others who might be waiting to meet the suspect could have been pursued.’
Lord Taylor CJ
Gazette 24-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 22-Nov-1993, Times 10-Nov-1993, (1994) 99 Cr App Rep 97, [1994] 3 All ER 741
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Code C s66
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Sewa Singh Gill and Paramjit Singh Gill CACD 31-Jul-2003
The appellants sought to challenge their convictions for cheating the Inland Revenue. They were accused of having hidden assets and income from the revenue. The appellants objected to the use at trial of material obtained in a ‘Hansard’ interview. . .
CitedRegina v Dianne Senior and Samantha Senior CA 4-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed convictions for being involved in the illegal importation of cocaine, saying that questioning at the airport before a caution was administered was unlawful. By the time they were asked about the cases, the customs officers . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 April 2021; Ref: scu.87490

Regina v Dosanjh: CACD 1 May 1998

In cases involving repeated, and continuing abuse of the personal import allowances system, courts should pay less attention to mitigating factors. The standards for prison terms for different values and the court gave giuidance as to when consecutive offences were correct.
Rose VP CACD LJ, Butterfield, Richards JJ
Gazette 03-Jun-1998, Times 07-May-1998, [1998] EWCA Crim 1450, [1998] 3 All ER 618, [1999] 1Cr App R (S)107, [1998] Crim LR 593, [1999] 1 Cr App R 371
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(1)(b)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Basra CACD 22-Feb-2002
The defendant appealed his sentence for a substantial money laundering offence. The antecedent offence was that of fraudulent evasion of VAT
Held: The maximum sentence for the antecedent offence was seven years, and for the offence under s93A, . .
ModifiedRegina v Czyzewski; Regina v Bryan; Regina v Mitchell; Regina v Diafi; Regina v Ward CACD 16-Jul-2003
The court set down detailed guidelines for sentencing for smuggling, but stated they were not to be treated as a straitjacket.
Held: The principle factors will be the level of duty evaded, the sophistication of methods used, the defendant’s . .
CitedRegina v Neal, Hood CACD 28-Nov-2003
The defendants appealed sentence for having been involved in the large scale importation of cigarettes evading customs duty.
Held: The judge had paid proper attention to Dosanjh. Having regard also to Czyzewski, the sentences were within the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 March 2021; Ref: scu.154324

Regina v Hayward: CACD 24 Jun 1998

Where a transaction would normally allow suspension of payment of duty, the duty became payable immediately if the documents had been falsified. Offence was committed irrespective of where the goods had eventually been sold. A failure to comply with the regulations meant that an offence of using false documents was committed despite a claim that the goods were purchased in France.
Times 13-Jul-1998, Gazette 24-Jun-1998, [1998] EWHC Crim 1898
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
DistinguishedGreenalls Management Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 26-Jun-2003
The appellant operated an approved storage facility, holding alcoholic drinks. Drinks were to be exported, and were released on that basis. They were later diverted and sold within the UK market, evading the appropriate duty. The company appealed a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 March 2021; Ref: scu.86833

Revenue and Customs v FMX Food Merchants Import Export Co Ltd: UTTC 10 Dec 2015

Customs Duty – import of Chinese garlic falsely declared as Cambodian origin – Customs Code Art 221 – customs debt resulting from a criminal act – post clearance demand issued after expiry of the three year period – no express provisions in UK law extending the three year time limit – whether notification valid in the absence of such legislation – FTT held the notification invalid – appeal allowed — no need for express provisions in UK law to extend the three year time limit – notification valid
[2015] UKUT 669 (TCC)
England and Wales
Appeal fromFMX Food Merchants Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 29-Nov-2013
FTTTx Customs duty – import of Chinese garlic, falsely declared as Cambodian in origin – late issue of post-clearance demand note for unpaid duty – whether the customs debt was the result of an act which, at the . .

Cited by:
At UTTCFMX Food Merchants Import Export Co Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 30-Oct-2018
Post-clearance demand for customs duty almost seven years after the taxpayer had imported garlic into the United Kingdom, which had been falsely declared to be of a certain origin, and just under four years after the customs became aware of the . .
At UTTCFMX Food Merchants Import Export Co Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 29-Jan-2020
This appeal concerns the meaning and effect of a short, innocent-sounding, phrase in article 221(4) of the (now superseded) Customs Code of the EU, contained in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 March 2021; Ref: scu.558964

Wortmann KG Internationale Schuhproduktionen v Hauptzollamt Bielefeld: ECJ 18 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs Union and Common Customs Tariff – Reimbursement of import duties – Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (Customs Code) – Article 241, first paragraph, first indent – Obligation of a Member State to provide for the payment of default interest even where no action has been brought before the national courts
ECLI:EU:C:2017:19, [2017] EUECJ C-365/15, [2017] All ER (D) 55, EU:C:2017:19
Cited by:
CitedLittlewoods Ltd and Others v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs SC 1-Nov-2017
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 March 2021; Ref: scu.573264

Da Costa and Co (a Firm) and Collins v Thames Magistrates Court and H M Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 25 Jan 2002

The claimant sought to challenge search warrants issued by the respondents. The warrants were criticised as being too widely drawn, and in breach of the 1984 Act. Criticism was also made of the implementation of the searches, in the use of excess numbers of officers, and the taking of images of hard disks, thus acquiring privileged information about other clients of the accountant claimants.
Held: The imaging of the disks was less intrusive, and no different in principal from the seizure of a ledger book. The officers also questioned staff members using a pre-prepared questionnaire. The use of that should have been raised with the judge issuing the warrant. However no remedy was to be granted save for another admittedly unlawful search.
The Commissioners’ power to seize ‘documents’ when entering with a warrant under paragraph 10(3)(b) of Schedule 11 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 could extend to the physical removal of computers. ‘Documents’ were defined in section 96(1) of that Act as ‘anything in which information is recorded’, a very similar definition to that in section 114(2) of the Finance Act 2008. The court accepted a submission that: ‘A computer hard disk is a single storage entity which falls within the definition of a ‘document’ in section 96(1) of the 1994 Act because it is something ‘in which information of any kind is recorded’.
Lord Justice Kennedy, and Mrs Justice Hallett
[2002] EWHC 40 (Admin), [2002] STC 267, [2003] BVC 3, [2002] BTC 5605, [2002] STI 112, [2002] Crim LR 504
Vallue Added Tax Act 1994 72, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 15(6)(b
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedH, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioners of Inland Revenue Admn 23-Oct-2002
The appellant sought judicial review of the seizure by the respondents of computers found on its premises in the course of executing warrants under the Act, even though the computers might contain other matters not relevant to any investigation.
CitedGlenn and Co (Essex) Ltd), Regina (on The Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs Admn 18-Jun-2010
The company objected to the search of its offices and removal by the defendant of its computers, the officers having entered without any warrant purporting to use powers under the 1989 Act.
Held: The request for judicial review failed. The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.167465

Bradgate Containers Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 10 May 2011

Customs duty and import VAT – inward processing relief – failure to respect time limits for re-export – whether ‘obvious negligence’ or ‘special situation’ – correct customs debtor – entry details – Articles 59, 118, 204 and 239 of Regulation 2913/92 and Articles 199, 200, 205, 222-224, 859, 860, 899 and 905 of Regulation 2454/93 – appeal allowed
[2011] UKFTT 308 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.443019

Commission v Portugal C-23/10: ECJ 17 Mar 2011

ECJ State Failure – Introduction for free circulation of fresh bananas – Weight said does not match the actual weight – Duty of customs authorities to verify the declared weight – Community Customs Code – Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 – Articles 68 ff – Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 – Article 290a – Annex 38b – EU own resources – Loss of revenue – Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89 – Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 – Articles 2, 6, 9, 10 and 11
[2011] EUECJ C-23/10

Updated: 06 March 2021; Ref: scu.430708

Marishipping And Transport v Marishipping and Transport BV (Customs Union): ECJ 17 Feb 2011

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 – Common Customs Tariff – Customs duties – Relief – Pharmaceutical substances – Composition – Restrictions.
C-11/10, [2011] EUECJ C-11/10
Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87

Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430214

Philips C-495/09: ECJ 3 Feb 2011

ECJ (Customs Union) Goods placed under the external transit procedure – Intellectual property rights – Regulation (EC) No 3295/94 and Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 – Treatment of goods in transit as if they were goods produced in the territory of the Union (‘production fiction’) – Conditions governing action by the customs authorities in cases where goods in transit are counterfeit or pirated – Suspected infringement of an intellectual property right.
C-495/09, [2011] EUECJ C-495/09, [2011] EUECJ C-495/09 – O
Bailii, Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 3295/94

Updated: 04 March 2021; Ref: scu.428503

Philips C-446/09: ECJ 3 Feb 2011

ECJ (Customs Union) Goods placed under the external transit procedure – Intellectual property rights – Regulation (EC) No 3295/94 and Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 – Treatment of goods in transit as if they were goods produced in the territory of the Union (‘production fiction’) – Conditions governing action by the customs authorities in cases where goods in transit are counterfeit or pirated – Suspected infringement of an intellectual property right.
C-446/09, [2011] EUECJ C-446/09 – O, [2012] EUECJ C-446/09
Bailii, Bailii

Updated: 04 March 2021; Ref: scu.428502

Lecson Elektromobile GmbH v Hauptzollamt Dortmund: ECJ 22 Dec 2010

ECJ (Customs Union) Common Customs Tariff – Tariff classification – Combined Nomenclature – Section XVII – Transport equipment – Chapter 87 – ‘Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock, and parts and accessories thereof’ – Headings 8703 and 8713 – Three or four-wheeled electric vehicles designed for the transport of one person, reaching a maximum speed of 6 to 15 km/h and having a separate, adjustable steering column, known as ‘electric mobility scooters’.
C-12/10, [2010] EUECJ C-12/10

Updated: 03 March 2021; Ref: scu.427707

Manor Park Trading Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Oct 2010

POST CLEARANCE DEMAND NOTE – Anti-Dumping Duty – importation of cotton-type bed linen – incorrect declaration of country of origin – was it an error which could not reasonably have been detected by Appellant? – no – appeal dismissed
[2010] UKFTT 505 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 02 March 2021; Ref: scu.426628

Flagg v Director of Revenue for The UK Border Agency: FTTTx 27 Oct 2010

FTTTx EXCISE DUTY – Restitution of vehicle seized at the time of a importation of excise goods on which the duty was sought to be evaded – whether Officer’s decision that there was no evidence of exceptional hardship justifying a departure from the Revenue’s policy in cases such as the instant case not to offer a vehicle for restoration was unreasonable – evidence as to the Appellant’s ability to work and his health considered – held the Officer’s decision was not unreasonable – appeal dismissed
[2010] UKFTT 518 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 02 March 2021; Ref: scu.426614

GE Medical Systems Information Technology Gmbh v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 15 Sep 2010

CUSTOMS DUTIES – TARIFF CLASSIFICATION – The Goods analysed the gases in a patient’s respiration during surgical operations and modules of a parent patient monitoring systems – HMRC conceded that the correct classification was TC 901820 00 00 – Appeal allowed
[2010] UKFTT 437 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 02 March 2021; Ref: scu.426575

Ashworth and Another v The United Kingdom Border Agency: FTTTx 6 Aug 2010

FTTTx EXCISE DUTY – traveller’s exemption – tobacco and car seized on entry to UK – seizure challenged but challenge withdrawn before condemnation proceedings begun – restoration of tobacco refused but car restored on payment – only reason advanced for restoration and remission of payment that goods for own use – appeal dismissed.
[2010] UKFTT 364 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 27 February 2021; Ref: scu.422346

Abbey Forwarding Ltd v Hone and Others: ChD 30 Jul 2010

Lewison J
[2010] EWHC 2029 (Ch)
England and Wales
CitedRevenue and Customs v Dempster (T/A Boulevard) ChD 24-Jan-2008
The revenue wished to refuse a claim to set off input tax for two transactions involving the alleged purchase of software. They said the transactions were a sham.
Held: The revenue’s appeal failed.
Briggs J said: ‘the critical question . .

Cited by:
CitedLondon Borough of Haringey v Hines CA 20-Oct-2010
The authority sought rescission of a lease granted to the defendant under the right to buy scheme, saying that she had misrepresented her occupation when applying. The tenant replied that no adequate evidence had been brought that she was not a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 February 2021; Ref: scu.421234

Huntingwood Trading Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs: Admn 21 Jan 2009

Application for judicial review of a decision by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs dated 25th April 2007 to disallow 101 claims made by the claimant, Huntingwood Trading Limited, in respect of excise duty drawback totalling andpound;1,263,865. The two grounds on which the claimant sought judicial review were first that the commissioners had engendered in the claimant a legitimate expectation that a certain course of action would be followed in relation to the making and paying of drawback claims; and that it is unfair and an abuse of power for the Commissioners to frustrate that legitimate expectation by refusing to make the payments.
Stadlen J
[2009] EWHC 290 (Admin)
England and Wales

Updated: 26 February 2021; Ref: scu.420984

Denwire Ltd v The Commissioners for Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Dec 2009

ECJ Customs-Anti-Dumping Duty on imports of steel wire rope from China-goods declared under incorrect community codes not attracting ADD – C18 Demand-ADD conceded on certain imports but waiver of demand sought under Article 220(2)(b)of the Community Customs code – Appeal dismissed.
[2009] UKFTT 343 (TC)

Updated: 24 February 2021; Ref: scu.409142

Yesmoke Tobacco (Judgment): ECJ 9 Oct 2014

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Directives 95/59/EC and 2011/64/EU – Structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco – Establishment of an excise duty – Principle establishing one rate of excise duty for all cigarettes – Possibility for the Member States of establishing a minimum amount of excise duty – Cigarettes in the lowest price category – National legislation – Specific category of cigarettes – Excise duty set at 115%
T. von Danwitz (Rapporteur), P
C-428/13, [2014] EUECJ C-428/13
Directive 2011/64/EU, Directive 95/59/EC

Updated: 23 February 2021; Ref: scu.537480

Belgische Staat v Direct Parcel Distribution Belgium NV: ECJ 28 Jan 2010

ECJ (Customs Union) Community Customs Code – Customs debt – Amount of duty – Articles 217 and 221 – Communities’ own resources – Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 – Article 6 – Requirement of entry in the accounts of the amount of duty before it is communicated to the debtor – Definition of ‘legally owed.
C-264/08, [2010] EUECJ C-264/08

Updated: 22 February 2021; Ref: scu.396577

Motorola Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 Jun 2009

FTTTx CUSTOMS DUTIES – tariff classification – stand-alone WAN apparatus and modem – whether to be classified before 1 January 2007 in heading 8471 (automatic data-processing machines and units thereof) or heading 8517 (electrical apparatus for line telephony) – Peacock, Cabletron Systems and Olicom considered – all goods properly classified in heading 8471 – reference to Court of Justice unnecessary – appeals allowed
[2009] UKFTT 123 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373689

Morgan v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jun 2009

FTTTx EXCISE DUTY – 8.5 kgs of hand-rolling tobacco seized by Commissioners on grounds imported for commercial use – condemnation proceedings commenced in magistrates’ court – Commissioners decision not to restore goods – appellant failed to attend magistrates’ court hearing and goods condemned – restoration proceedings commenced – whether appellant entitled to challenge legality of seizure of goods in restoration proceedings – no, on grounds it would be abuse of process – whether decision not to restore was reasonable – yes – appeal dismissed – Council Directive (EEC) No 92/12 Arts 7 to 9; The Excise Goods, Beer and Tobacco Products (Amendment) Regulations 2002 SI 2002 No. 2691; Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 Ss 49(1) and 152(b); Finance Act 1994 Ss 14 to 16
[2009] UKFTT 134 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373688

Arthur v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 15 Jul 2009

FTTTx EXCISE – Restoration conditions – Vehicle – Jaguar sold by Customs when restoration conditions under appeal – Tobacco goods on not for profit basis – Appellant asserted some for personal use and some for gifts – Duty on goods andpound;2,285 – Fee for restoration of vehicle andpound;2,000 – Review decision failed to specify payment in lieu of car sold – Cheque accepted subject to dispute as to andpound;2,000 deduction – Review did not address own use element – Rainbow (2003) E393 considered – Although review defective no new review directed – Appeal dismissed
[2009] UKFTT 168 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373699

Gorman v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Jun 2009

FTTTx EXCISE DUTY – RESTORATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS – HMRC Officers discovered red diesel in the fuel tank of a vehicle – Appellant contended that the red diesel was already in the vehicle when he bought it and that he never used the vehicle on the public road – the vehicle had a current tax disc and parked in a yard with ready access to red diesel – review decision reasonable – Appeal dismissed
[2009] UKFTT 147 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373680

Fayed v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 Jun 2009

FTTTX EXCISE DUTY- 10.10kg of royal jelly honey (brought on a visit to Egypt) – advised could only bring in 1 KG – failed to apply to magistrates – honey deemed forfeit – two reviews refusing to return honey – subsequently transpired that Egyptian honey could not be imported under the Product of Animal Origin (Third Country Imports) (England) Regulations 2006 – officer acted reasonably – case dismissed
[2009] UKFTT 125 (TC)
Product of Animal Origin (Third Country Imports) (England) Regulations 2006
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373679

C Plumb and Sons (Hatfield) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 May 2009

EXCISE DUTY – RESTORATION WITH CONDITIONS – Appellant’s vehicle with red diesel in fuel tank – innocent mistake – took steps to ensure that drivers did not put red diesel in fuel tank – review officer did not give due weight to individual circumstances – decision unreasonable – Appeal dismissed.
[2009] UKFTT 93 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373635

Repertoire Culinaire Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Apr 2009

FTTTx EXCISE DUTIES – Cooking wine and cooking cognac – whether subject to excise duty as ethyl alcohol – whether exempt from excise duty under art. 27.1 of Directive 92/83/EEC – whether s.4FA 1995 adequately implements art. 27.1(f) of the Directive – whether a reference should be made to the Court of Justice – Skatterverket v Gourmet Classic Limited (Case C-459/06) considered – Questions referred to the Court of Justice
[2009] UKFTT 75 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373624

Millennium Fresh Foods Limited v Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Apr 2009

Customs Duty – Customs procedures – Procedure for Processing Under Customs Control – Appeal against refusal to authorise procedure – Whether Customs decision on review unreasonable – Whether change in economic factors require fresh examination of the ‘economic condition’ for authorisation – Whether HMRC wrongly treated themselves as bound to follow the conclusion of the Customs Committee
[2009] UKFTT 43 (TC)
England and Wales

Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.373622

Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Trieste v Pometon: ECJ 4 Jun 2009

ECJ (Free Movement Of Goods) Community customs code – Regulation (EC) No 384/96 – Protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 – Protection of the European Communities’ financial interests – Processing under the inward processing procedure – Irregular practice.
[2009] EUECJ C-158/08

Updated: 16 February 2021; Ref: scu.347050

Peet v Revenue and Customs: Excs 14 May 2008

EXCISE DUTY – restoration of goods – cigarettes and tobacco – appeal against re-review ordered by previous tribunal – ‘guideline’ amounts not exceeded – some of the goods intended to be provided on a non-profit basis to others – on re-review part of the goods was to be restored – re-review decision reasonable – appeal dismissed
[2008] UKVAT-Excise E01111
England and Wales

Updated: 10 February 2021; Ref: scu.272192

Broadman v Revenue and Customs: Excs 22 Feb 2008

Excise Duty – Importation of tobacco and alcohol for ‘a commercial purpose’ – Seizure of Audi A4 – Whether the goods acquired that were not for own use or to be given away were only to be transferred to others for reimbursement of cost – Appeal dismissed – Right to request a re-hearing at which the Appellant would be present in person to give evidence and the circumstances where the Tribunal might agree and order that such a re-hearing be allowed
[2008] UKVAT-Excise E01088
England and Wales

Updated: 10 February 2021; Ref: scu.272165

Dawkin v Revenue and Customs: VDT 2 Apr 2007

VDT EXCISE GOODS – Procedure – Appellant appealed against both seizure and restoration – Review decision on restoration made before appeal against seizure withdrawn – Whether Appellant able to contest facts relating to seizure before Tribunal – Weller considered.
RESTORATION – Reviewing office proceeded on basis Appellant would not have succeeded in Magistrates Court – Whether decision reasonable – Appeal allowed
[2007] UKVAT-Excise E01036
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromHM Revenue and Customs v Dawkin ChD 2008
David Richards J reviewed the authorities and stated the test which has been applied in the tribunals and courts since Gascoyne: ‘The issue is whether the Tribunal misdirected itself in its consideration of the question of abuse of process. The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 February 2021; Ref: scu.272116