Tag: VAT

Revenue and Customs v Astral Construction Ltd: UTTC 20 Jan 2015

VALUE ADDED TAX – zero rating – construction of nursing home on site of and incorporating redundant church building – whether construction of building for purposes of Item 2 Group 5 Schedule 8 VAT Act 1994 – yes – whether enlargement of or extension to existing building – no – whether special residential conversion of building – yes – appeal dismissed

[2015] UKUT 21 (TCC), [2015] STI 252, [2015] BVC 505, [2015] STC 1033
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542300

Revenue and Customs v Longridge On The Thames: UTTC 13 Nov 2014

VAT – whether building intended for use solely for a relevant charitable purpose – charity with objects of educating young people in water borne activities – construction of training centre – whether construction services zero-rated – whether charity carrying on a business/economic activity – Section 30 and items 2 and 4 of Group 5 of Schedule 8 to VATA 1994 – Note (6) to Group 5

[2014] UKUT 504 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Charity

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539411

Westinsure Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 13 Oct 2014

VAT – exemption for provision of services of an insurance broker or agent – whether exemption applies to services provided to facilitate insurance brokers obtaining better terms and related benefits from insurance companies and other insurance related services – Article 135.1(a) Directive 2006/112 EC – Schedule 9 Group 2 Value Added Tax Act 1994

[2014] UKUT 452 (TCC), [2014] STI 3194, [2014] BVC 540, [2015] STC 238
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538015

Sheilds and Sons Partnership v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Oct 2014

VAT: Agricultural Flat-rate Scheme – whether the Appellant’s certificate to use the scheme can lawfully be withdrawn on the basis of protection of the revenue – yes; Regulation 206(1)(i) VAT Regulations 1995 and Articles 295 to 302 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC

[2014] UKFTT 944 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Agriculture

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537683

ING Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 7 Oct 2014

VAT – claim to recover input tax incurred by bank in providing deposit accounts – deposit accounts provided ‘free of charge’ to bank’s customers – whether supply for consideration – yes – whether consideration capable of valuation – yes – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 938 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537674

Fogarty (Filled Products) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 7 Oct 2014

VAT default surcharges – conjoined appeals relating to three separate VAT quarter – whether reasonable excuse late payment – insufficiency of funds – whether reasonable excuse – yes – whether time to pay arrangement in place – Appeal allowed in part

[2014] UKFTT 936 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537672

Barlin Associates Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 15 Oct 2014

VAT – taxpayer issued invoices to client which were unpaid – taxpayer eventually issuing legal proceedings against client – taxpayer de-registered – out of court settlement reached for lesser amount than amount of invoices – taxpayer issuing credit note for balance – HMRC refusing to repay balance of VAT – appeal allowed

[2014] UKFTT 957 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537664

Kuig Property Investments Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Sep 2014

VAT – default surcharge – late payment – payment on account regime – no seven day grace period for online payment -discriminatory- funds held in account charged by bank – late payment due to issue with bank – held- Tribunal no jurisdiction to consider concessionary treatment applied by HMRC – no evidence that late payment only due to late release of funds by bank – no reasonable excuse – appeal dismissed.

[2014] UKFTT 906 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537259

Sanjeevraj (T/A Cambridge Food and Wine) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Sep 2014

VALUE ADDED TAX – assessment under section 73 VATA – under-declared takings – clearly there were under-declared takings – what the correct amount of the assessment ought to be having regard to the evidence – found the correct amount was less than the amount assessed and the assessment reduced accordingly – appeal allowed in part

[2014] UKFTT 871 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536511

London Cellular Communications Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Sep 2014

VAT — receipts from Apple stores for 1216 IPhones – receipts not valid invoices for purposes of regulation 14 of the value added tax regulations 1995 (as amended )- HMRC declined to exercise discretion under section 29 of the value added tax act 1954- 55% of receipts unnamed – legitimacy of the transactions in doubt – appeal dismissed.

[2014] UKFTT 874 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536507

McAllister v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Sep 2014

VALUE ADDED TAX – whether operating a trade of buying and selling used cars and car parts – no – whether liable to be registered for VAT – no – whether assessment made to best judgement – no – whether penalty due under VAT Section 67(1) – no – appeal allowed.

[2014] UKFTT 875 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536508

Jyske Finans A/S v Skatteministeriet intervening parties: Nordania Finans A/S, BG Factoring A/S: ECJ 8 Dec 2005

ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13B(c) – Exemptions – Exemption of supplies of goods excluded from the right to deduct – Resale of motor cars purchased second-hand by a leasing company – Article 26a – Special arrangements for sales of second-hand goods.

[2006] CEC 404, [2005] EUECJ C-280/04, [2005] ECR I-10683, [2006] STI 39, [2006] STC 1744
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Pendragon Plc and Others SC 10-Jun-2015
‘This appeal is about an elaborate scheme designed and marketed by KPMG relating to demonstrator cars used by retail distributors for test drives and other internal purposes. In the ordinary course, a car distributor will buy new cars for use as . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.235855

A1 Lofts Ltd v Revenue and Customs: ChD 30 Oct 2009

Lewison J said: ‘The court is often called upon to decide whether a written contract falls within a particular legal description. In so doing the court will identify the rights and obligations of the parties as a matter of construction of the written agreement; but it will then go on to consider whether those obligations fall within the relevant legal description. Thus the question may be whether those rights and obligations are properly characterised as a licence or tenancy (as in Street v Mountford [1985] AC 809); or as a fixed or floating charge (as in Agnew v IRC [2001] 2 AC 710), or as a consumer hire agreement (as in TRM Copy Centres (UK) Ltd v Lanwall Services Ltd [2009] 1 WLR 1375). In all these cases the starting point is to identify the legal rights and obligations of the parties as a matter of contract before going on to classify them.’

Lewison J
[2009] EWHC 2694 (Ch), [2009] BVC 924, [2010] STC 214, [2009] NPC 121
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
At VDT – A1 Lofts Ltd and A1 Loft Conversions Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 3-Dec-2008
FTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – Supply of services – Loft conversions – Taxpayer agreed with contractors they would be paid by clients out of clients’ accounts – Whether taxpayer project manager on clients’ behalf – . .

Cited by:
Cited – 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, . .
Cited – Uber Bv and Others v Aslam and Others CA 19-Dec-2018
Uber drivers are workers
The claimant Uber drivers sought the status of workers, allowing them to claim the associated statutory employment benefits. The company now appealed from a finding that they were workers.
Held: The appeal failed (Underhill LJ dissenting) The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Construction

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.377352

Grange Restaurants Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Aug 2014

FTTTX VAT – Notice of Requirement to provide security – protection of Revenue – connection with businesses which failed to honour VAT obligations – cash business with collection of VAT not paid – Whether Respondents actions in seeking security and the quantum thereof reasonable – yes – Appeal dismissed – VATA 1994 Sch 11 para 4

[2014] UKFTT 832 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536200

Boxmoor Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 21 Aug 2014

FTTTx VAT – zero-rating for construction of new building – planning permission for extension and alteration – building demolished in substance save for part of facade -whether supply was of construction of new building or alteration of existing building -whether retention of facade was condition of planning permission – HELD -retention of facade not explicit or implicit condition of planning permission – not supply of new building – appeal dismissed.

[2014] UKFTT 833 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536197

Charles (T/A Boston Computer Group Europe) v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 24 Jul 2014

VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – MTIC appeal – whether connection with fraud established – whether, if so, appellant should have known of that connection – inadequate explanation of F-tT’s reasoning and conclusions – whether evidence sufficient to support F-tT’s conclusions – yes – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKUT 328 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535704

South African Tourist Board v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Jun 2014

VAT – input tax recoverability – s 26 VATA – reg 103 VAT Regulations – whether certain activities of appellant would be taxable supplies if made in the UK – whether supplies made for a consideration – art 2, Principal VAT Directive – Apple and Pear; Tolsma – whether appellant acting as a taxable person – economic activity – art 9, Principal VAT Directive

[2014] UKUT 280 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 17 December 2021; Ref: scu.534520

Revenue and Customs v Lok’Nstore Group Plc: UTTC 23 Jun 2014

VAT – input tax – partial exemption – company making taxable supplies of storage and exempt supplies of insurance – special method for calculating proportion of deductible input tax on overheads – whether special method produces fairer and more reasonable result than standard method – held yes by FTT – whether FTT erred in law in so concluding – held no – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKUT 288 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 17 December 2021; Ref: scu.534518

Revenue and Customs v Earlsferry Thistle Golf Club: UTTC 2 Jun 2014

VAT – jurisdiction of Tribunal – appeal by recipient of supply against refusal by HMRC to repay VAT erroneously charged on exempt supply – VATA 1994, section 80 – exercise of Community law right to obtain repayment directly from HMRC – whether Tribunal erred in refusing application to strike out – Appeal allowed.

[2014] UKUT 250 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 17 December 2021; Ref: scu.534517

BCR Leasing v Agentia Nationala de Administrare Fiscala – Directia generala de administrare a marilor contribuabili: ECJ 17 Jul 2014

ECJ Judgment Of The Court – VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 16 and 18 – Financial leasing – Goods under a financial leasing contract – Non-recovery of those goods by the leasing company after the termination of the contract – Missing goods

C-438/13, [2014] EUECJ C-438/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2093
Bailii

European, VAT

Updated: 17 December 2021; Ref: scu.534443

African Consolidated Resources Plc v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 11 Jun 2014

VAT – holding company – economic activities – taxable supplies – intra-group loan finance – intra- group management services- HELD – loan finance quasi- equity – not carried on on commercial basis -not economic activity – management services -insufficient link between fixed fee and services provided – not taxable supply – appeals dismissed.

[2014] UKFTT 580 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526903

Ahmad v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Jun 2014

VALUE ADDED TAX – importation – tax paid at time of importation – artworks on exhibition in UK – items unsold – shipped back to USA approx one year after importation – subsequent claim for repayment of VAT – application treated as being for retrospective temporary import authorisation – application refused by HMRC as over one year since entry of goods – EC Regulation 2454/93 Art. 508 – if authorisation had been possible, customs declaration would have been required – potential claim would be affected by difference between items imported and those returned – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 548 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526904

Oriflame UK Ltd v The Commissioners for Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 May 2014

VAT – Preliminary issue – Single supply made by appellant to its non-VAT registered sales consultants – Subsequent retail sale of goods sold by sales consultants – Direction that output tax on appellant’s due at ‘open market value on a sale by retail’ – Whether ‘open market value on a sale by retail’ should include delivery charges made to sales consultants – Appeal Allowed – Paragraph 2 Schedule 6 Value Added Tax Act 1994

[2014] UKFTT 454 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526856

Brown v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 May 2014

Value Added Tax – Claim that the licence from a marina operator to allow the Appellant to leave his boat for 12 months on the concrete hardstanding adjacent to the marina to enable repairs to be made to the hull and other work to be undertaken, with permission for the Appellant to live on the boat during the works, should have been exempt from VAT – similar claim in relation to the later licence to moor the boat for 6 months on the bank in the marina while further work was undertaken, again with the Appellant living on the boat – claim that the provision of parts for the boat that ranked as a qualifying ship should have been zero-rated – disputes as to the content of HMRC’s notices – claims made concerning alleged infringement of Articles 8 and 14 of the Human Rights’ Act and the Equality Act 2010 – Appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 497 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526795

GSM Intertrade Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 29 Apr 2014

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – whether the mobile phones allegedly acquired by and then sold and despatched abroad by appellant had existed and whether they had corresponded to the goods described in the respective invoices – Regulation 14(1) Value Added Tax Regulations 1995 – whether reasonable for HMRC not to exercise discretion under Regulation 29 (2) Value Added Tax Regulations 1995 to allow claim for input tax – Appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 399 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525344

Karandal v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Apr 2014

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – appeal against decision compulsorily to register appellant pursuant to paragraph 5 Schedule 1 to Value Added Tax Act 1994 – appeal against late notification penalty – whether appellant liable to compulsory registration – yes -whether liable to a penalty for late notification of requirement to register under section 67 Value Added Tax Act 1994- yes- appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 321 (TC)
Bailii

VAT

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525354

Ermis v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Apr 2014

VAT – dishonest evasion penalty – whether appellant deliberately failed to register and account for VAT – yes – whether appellant failed to register and account for VAT for the purpose of evading VAT – yes – whether the appellant dishonest – yes – whether penalty should be further reduced – no – appeal dismissed and penalty confirmed

[2014] UKFTT 367 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525335

Softhouse Consulting Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Costs): UTTC 19 Feb 2014

UTTC After perusing the respondents’ application for a direction in respect of their costs of and incidental to the appellant’s application for permission to appeal, there having been no representations thereon by the appellant, It is directed that the application is dismissed.

[2014] UKUT B3 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Costs

Updated: 02 December 2021; Ref: scu.523486

British Printing Industries Federation v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 Feb 2014

FTTTx VAT – exempt services – Value Added Tax Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 9, item 1(d), note (5) and Article 132(1)(l) of the Principal VAT Directive (2006/112/EC) – employers federation providing services to members in return for annual subscriptions – whether membership subscriptions exempt from VAT – whether ‘trade union’ association – whether primary purpose of federation included making representations to third party decision makers – whether objectives of association were for the collective interests of members

[2014] UKFTT 150 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.521774

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 supplies made by it to travel agents wholesale supplies on business to business basis

[2010] UKFTT 120 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
At FTTTx – Secret Hotels2 Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 3-Dec-2012
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 . .
At FTTTx – 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, . .
At FTTTx – 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 . .
At FTTTx – 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: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.408975

Davis and Dann Ltd and Precis (1080) Ltd v HMRC: UTTC 6 Aug 2013

UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – denial of repayment of input tax due to MTIC fraud – ‘grey market’ transaction in razor blades – nature of and terms on which transactions entered into – other parties to the transactions unconnected with the fraud – whether FTT erred in concluding on the facts that the only reasonable explanation for the circumstances in which the taxpayers’ purchases took place was that they were connected with fraud – yes – whether taxpayers should have been aware of the connection with fraud earlier in the chain of transactions – no – appeal allowed

[2013] UKUT 374 (TCC), [2013] STI 2860, [2013] BVC 1707, [2014] STC 39
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Davis and Dann Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 17-Jan-2012
FTTTx Value Added Tax – MTIC appeal involving purchases of razor blades by the Appellants in April and May 2006 – whether the Appellants should have known that their purchases were connected to the fraudulent . .

Cited by:
At UTTC – Davis and Dann Ltd and Another v HM Revenue and Customs CA 15-Mar-2016
The Revenue appealed from rejection of its refusal to refund input tax in the basis that the company though itself innocent of VAT fraud should have understood that the transaction was part of a MTIC fraud. The court was now asked whether the Upper . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.521006

Toner and Another (T/A The Soft Drinks Co) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jul 2013

FTTTx VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – denial of right to deduct on grounds that the Appellant knew or should have known that the transaction was part of fraud by others – alleged MTIC – whether shown that the Appellant’s transactions connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT – yes – whether Appellant ‘knew or should have known’ of fraud – yes – valid refusal of right to deduct – appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 670 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.518588

Le Bistingo Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Oct 2013

FTTTx VAT – purported appeal against ‘decision’ of HMRC that appellant required to make online VAT returns – liability to file online arising automatically under secondary legislation without requirement for HMRC to reach a ‘decision’- whether the European Convention on Human Rights relevant – no – appeal struck out for lack of jurisdiction

[2013] UKFTT 524 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516904

GSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: Admn 22 Apr 2013

The claimant, a partnersip beween a commercial company and tow NHS hospital trusts sought an order suspending a decision that its services, the supply of pathology services to the trusts was exempt from VAT

Leggatt J
[2013] EWHC 1801 (Admin), [2013] STI 2566
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – GSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs (No 2) Admn 22-Apr-2013
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.515304

Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings: ECJ 22 Dec 2010

ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Right to deduction – Purchase of vehicles and use for leasing transactions – Differences between the tax regimes of two Member States – Prohibition of abusive practices
‘taxable persons are generally free to choose the organisational structures and the form of transactions which they consider to be most appropriate for their economic activities and for the purposes of limiting their tax burdens’, albeit that this is subject to an exception for ‘abusive transactions’.

K. Lenaerts, P
[2010] EUECJ C-277/09, ECLI:EU:C:2010:810, [2011] STI 262, [2011] BVC 138, [2011] STC 345
Bailii
European
Citing:
Opinion – Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings ECJ 30-Sep-2010
ECJ Opinion – Interpretation of Article 17(3)(a) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Transactions carried out with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage – Provision of vehicle leasing services in the United Kingdom . .
At VDT (2) – RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Revenue and Customs VDT 3-May-2005
VDT Applications – opposed motion to sist part of the proceedings in the appeal pending an ECJ Decision: Application for an order for disclosure of documents – necessity of documents, relevance to issue . .
At VDT (1) – RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Customs and Excise VDT 16-Nov-2004
VDT Application: Interlocutory Hearing – Jurisdiction – whether appeal raised in Edinburgh should be transmitted to London in respect that there was another connected appeal there – whether Appellants with . .
At Inner House – Revenue and Customs v RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh SCS 13-Jan-2006
SCS The taxpayer, a German subsidiary of a UK bank, carried on a banking and leasing business in Germany. It did not have a place of establishment in the UK. It was registered in the UK for VAT as a . .
At VDT (3) – RBS Deutschland Holdings Gmbh v Revenue and Customs VDT 24-Jul-2007
VDT VAT – deduction of input tax – leasing of cars within UK by German subsidiary company – cars purchased within UK, remaining there and subject to VAT in UK – leasing deemed to be supply of services in Germany . .

Cited by:
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Pendragon Plc and Others SC 10-Jun-2015
‘This appeal is about an elaborate scheme designed and marketed by KPMG relating to demonstrator cars used by retail distributors for test drives and other internal purposes. In the ordinary course, a car distributor will buy new cars for use as . .
Cited – 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.

European, VAT

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.513675

GSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs (No 2): Admn 22 Apr 2013

Leggatt J
[2013] EWHC 1823 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – GSTS Pathology Llp, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 22-Apr-2013
The claimant, a partnersip beween a commercial company and tow NHS hospital trusts sought an order suspending a decision that its services, the supply of pathology services to the trusts was exempt from VAT . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.511221

Revenue And Customs v Newey: ECJ 20 Jun 2013

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Sixth VAT Directive – Article 2(1) and Article 6(1) – Meaning of ‘supply of services’ – Supply of advertising and loan broking services – Exemptions – Economic and commercial reality of the transactions – Abusive practices – Transactions with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage
The Court emphasised: ‘that a supply of services is effected ‘for consideration’, within the meaning of article 2(1) of [the Sixth] directive, and hence is taxable, only if there is a legal relationship between the provider of the service and the recipient pursuant to which there is reciprocal performance, the remuneration received by the provider of the service constituting the value actually given in return for the service supplied to the recipient’. It explained that ‘the supply of services is therefore objective in nature and applies without regard to the purpose or results of the transactions concerned and without its being necessary for the tax authorities to carry out inquiries to determine the intention of the taxable person’. The court then observed that ‘consideration of economic and commercial realities is a fundamental criterion for the application of the common system of VAT’ and that ‘the contractual position normally reflects the economic and commercial reality of the transactions’. An exception to the normal rule that the contractual relationship is central was then identified by the court as being where ‘those contractual terms constitute a purely artificial arrangement which does not correspond with the economic and commercial reality of the transactions’
. . And: ‘As regards in particular the importance of contractual terms in categorising a transaction as a taxable transaction, it is necessary to bear in mind the case law of the court according to which consideration of economic and commercial realities is a fundamental criterion for the application of the common system of VAT
Given that the contractual position normally reflects the economic and commercial reality of the transactions and in order to satisfy the requirements of legal certainty, the relevant contractual terms constitute a factor to be taken into consideration when the supplier and the recipient in a ‘supply of services’ transaction within the meaning of articles 2(1) and 6(1) of the Sixth Directive have to be identified.
It may, however, become apparent that, sometimes, certain contractual terms do not wholly reflect the economic and commercial reality of the transactions.
That is the case in particular if it becomes apparent that those contractual terms constitute a purely artificial arrangement which does not correspond with the economic and commercial reality of the transactions.’

Ilesic, P
[2013] STI 2304, [2013] EUECJ C-653/11, [2013] BVC 259, [2013] STC 2432
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 11-May-2016
The court was asked whether the appellant, Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd (formerly MyTravel Group plc), was entitled to recover, by way of input tax VAT charged by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP in respect of services provided by PwC and paid for by . .
Cited – 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: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.511012

Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd: SC 20 Jun 2013

Decisions about the application of the VAT system are highly dependent upon the factual situations involved. The case-law of the Court of Justice indicates that, when determining the relevant supply in which a taxable person engages, regard must be had to all the circumstances in which the transaction in question takes place. In cases where a scheme operates through a construct of contractual relationships, it is necessary to look at the matter as a whole in order to determine its economic reality.

Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Walker, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath
[2013] UKSC 42, UKSC 2009/0154
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Redrow Group Plc HL 11-Feb-1999
Where house builders had paid the estate agents’ fees for exchanged property on sales, the supply had been, at least in part, to the builder, and the builder could accordingly recover the agents’ VAT as input tax. A supplier could be treated as . .
At VDT – Loyalty Management UK Ltd v Customs and Excise VDT 6-Apr-2005
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – the Appellant operates the Nectar programme under which customers who purchase goods (called primary goods) from certain retailers receive points which they may use to acquire . .
At ChD – Revenue and Customs v Loyalty Management UK Ltd ChD 22-Jun-2006
The taxpayer operated a substantial loyalty reward scheme (Nectar) for assorted companies. The Revenue appealed against an order allowing the company to reclaim input VAT. The court was asked now: ‘what is the proper characteristic, for VAT . .
See Also – Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd SC 13-Mar-2013
The company managed a card loyalty scheme for retailers. The Revenue appealed against a decision that the company could reclaim VAT input tax on the goods purchased on the customers redeeming their points. The ECJ had decided that the service . .
At ECJ – Loyalty Management UK (Taxation) ECJ 7-Oct-2010
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Taxable amount – Sales promotion scheme – Loyalty rewards scheme allowing customers to earn points from traders and to redeem them for loyalty rewards – Payments made by the operator of . .
ECJ Prel Ruling – Loyalty Management UK (Taxation) ECJ 7-Oct-2010
ECJ (prelimiary ruling) Sixth VAT Directive – Taxable amount – Sales promotion scheme – Loyalty rewards scheme allowing customers to earn points from traders and to redeem them for loyalty rewards – Payments made . .
Cited – Loyalty Management UK Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 5-Oct-2007
The company (LMUK) managed a loyalty scheme for retailers. Their customers were awarded point sunder the schem on purchasing items, and then redeeemed those points against other purchases. LMUK sought to recover input tax on the invoices it paid to . .

Cited by:
Cited – WHA Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 1-May-2013
The Court was asked as to the effectiveness of a scheme, known as Project C, designed to minimise the overall liability to VAT of a group of companies involved in motor breakdown insurance.
Held: The court dismissed WHA’s appeal. There had . .
Cited – Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.510940

Oxfam v Revenue and Customs: ChD 27 Nov 2009

The charity appealed against refusal to allow it to reclaim input VAT. It also sought judicial review of the decision of the Tribunal not to allow it to raise an argument of legitimate expectation. The charity had various subsidiaries conducting commercial activities, which paid VAT in its supplies. The parties disputed how input taxes were attributed between the different activitie, particularly in the context of unrestricted fundraising expenditure.
Held: The Tribunal had had power to listen to the argument on legitimate expectation. In 2000, the revenue had written to the claimant setting out the agreed calculation methods, but the law had altered on the Church of England case. However ‘in a case such as this, involving an assurance given to only one person and where there is no irrationality on the part of the public authority in adopting a different approach, the absence of detrimental reliance on the part of the person to whom the assurance is given is fatal to the argument that to modify the assurance would involve an abuse of power on the part of the public authority which gave the assurance.’

Sales J
[2009] EWHC 3078 (Ch), Times 31-Dec-2009
Bailii
Value Added Tax Act 1994 24(5), Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC 17
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Oxfam v Revenue and Customs VDT 30-Jul-2008
VDT VAT – INPUT TAX – Charity applying method apportioning VAT to business purposes – Church of England Children’s Society decision permitted the Appellant to recover part of VAT incurred on unrestricted . .
Cited – Gus Merchandise Corporation Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 24-Oct-1994
The Commissioners’ general tax management powers include a power to enter into a binding contract with taxpayers as to the method of calculation of Excess VAT paid on sales to agents was not recoverable since there was a binding agreement. . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v The Boots Company Plc ChD 16-Mar-2009
. .
Cited – Church of England Children’s Society v Revenue and Customs ChD 29-Jul-2005
The Society sent out free newsletters to its unpaid fund-raisers and supporters. They sought to deduct input tax charged to them from the supplies associated with the costs.
Held: The Society might be able to deduct such tax as residual input . .
Cited – Kretztechnik AG v Finanzamt Linz ECJ 26-May-2005
Europa Sixth VAT Directive – Supplies for consideration – Share issue – Admission of a company to a stock exchange – Deductibility of VAT).
Kretztechnik’s objects were the development and sale of . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte MFK Underwriting Agents Ltd CA 1990
Legitimate Expectation once created not withdrawn
The claimant said that a change of practice by the Revenue was contrary to a legitimate expectation.
Held: The Inland Revenue could not withdraw from a representation if it would cause: substantial unfairness to the applicant; if the . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – Bamber, Regina (on the Application Of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 21-Dec-2005
. .
Cited – Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
Cited – British Oxygen Co Ltd v Board of Trade HL 15-Jul-1970
Cylinders containing hydrogen gas were being put on a trailer pulled by a tractor for the purpose of delivery to the premises of the purchaser. One of the issues before the court was whether the function of the hydrogen trailers and the cylinders . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd HL 9-Apr-1981
Limitations on HMRC discretion on investigation
The Commissioners had been concerned at tax evasion of up to 1 million pounds a year by casual workers employed in Fleet Street. They agreed with the employers and unions to collect tax in the future, but that they would not pursue those who had . .
Cited – Mullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant had been imprisoned, but his conviction was later overturned. He had been a victim of a gross abuse of executive power. The British authorities had acted in breach of international law and had been guilty of ‘a blatant and extremely . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
Duty of Fairness to taxpayer – Written Assurance
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
Cited – In Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Charity, Administrative

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.381597

Axel Kittel v Belgian State; Belgian State v Recolta Recycling SPRL: ECJ 6 Jul 2006

ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Deduction of input tax – ‘Carousel’ fraud – Contract of sale incurably void under domestic law.
The right of a taxpayer to deduct Input Tax may be refused if: ‘it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that the taxable person knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT.’
Where it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that a recipient of a supply of goods is a taxable person who knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT, it is for the national court to refuse that taxable person entitlement to the right to deduct VAT he has paid: ‘an analysis of the terms ‘supply of goods effected by a taxable person acting as such’ and ‘economic activities’ shows that those terms, which define taxable transactions for the purposes of the Sixth Directive, are objective in nature and apply without regard to the purpose or results of the transactions concerned (see, to that effect, Joined Cases C-354/03, C-355/03 and C-484/03 Optigen [2006] Ch 218, paras. 43 and 44).
traders who take every precaution which could reasonably be required of them to ensure that their transactions are not connected with fraud . . must be able to rely on the legality of those transactions without the risk of losing their right to deduct the input VAT (see, to that effect, Case C-384/04 Federation of Technological Industries [2006] STC 1483, para. 33).
By contrast, the objective criteria which form the basis of the concepts of ‘supply of goods effected by a taxable person acting as such’ and ‘economic activity’ are not met where tax is evaded by the taxable person himself (see Case C-255/02 Halifax and Others [2006] Ch 387, paras. 59).
Where the tax authorities find that the right to deduct has been exercised fraudulently, they are permitted to claim repayment of the deducted sums retroactively (see, inter alia, Case 268/83 Rompelman [1985] 2 CMLR 202, para. 24; Case C-110/94 INZO [1996] STC 569, para. 24; and Joined Cases C-110/98 to C-147/98 Gabalfrisa [2002] STC 535, para. 46) . .
a taxable person who knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was taking part in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT must, for the purposes of the Sixth Directive, be regarded as a participant in that fraud, irrespective of whether or not he profited by the resale of the goods.
That is because in such a situation the taxable person aids the perpetrators of the fraud and becomes their accomplice.
In addition, such an interpretation, by making it more difficult to carry out fraudulent transactions, is apt to prevent them.
Therefore, it is for the referring court to refuse entitlement to the right to deduct where it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that the taxable person knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT, and to do so even where the transaction in question meets the objective criteria which form the basis of the concepts of ‘supply of goods effected by a taxable person acting as such’ and ‘economic activity”

C-439/04, [2006] EUECJ C-439/04
Bailii
European
Citing:
See Also – Axel Kittel v Belgian State; Belgian State v Recolta Recycling SPRL C-440/04 ECJ 6-Jul-2006
ECJ Sixth VAT Directive – Deduction of input tax – ‘Carousel’ fraud – Contract of sale incurably void under domestic law. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Mobilx 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 . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v SED Essex Ltd ChD 14-Jun-2013
Liquidator confirmed despite VAT challege
The Revenue sought the winding up of the company for non-payment of substantial arrears of VAT. The revenue had declined to allow VAT input claims. The company said that the petition was wrong since the debt was genuinely disputed.
Held: The . .
Cited – Else Refining and Recycling Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 23-Jul-2012
VALUE ADDED TAX – MTIC – HMRC’s refusal to repay VAT on supplies connected with fraudulent VAT evasion – connection conceded by the appellant – only issues were whether the appellant knew or should have known of the connection – Axel Kittel v . .
Cited – Microring Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Value Added Tax – Kittel Denial of Input Tax) FTTTx 12-Jul-2019
VALUE ADDED TAX — Kittel denial of input tax – strike out applications – whether issue estoppel applies – no – whether HMRC should be barred from part of the proceedings – no – – whether Appellant’s appeal should be struck out in part – no – . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.243021

British Eventing Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Aug 2010

FTTTx VAT – Appellant paying reverse premium on assignment of lease – whether locus standi to challenge taxable status of reverse premium and/or recover VAT paid on it; whether reverse premium attributable to assignment of lease and, if not, to what; whether HMRC’s decision to refuse permission to opt leased property wrong in law.

[2010] UKFTT 382 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.422348

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
Citing:
Cited – Total 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 . .
Cited – Gosling 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 . .
Cited – Attorney-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 . .
Cited – Attorney-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 . .
Cited – Inland 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 . .
Cited – Autologic 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 . .
Cited – Lonrho 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, . .
Cited – Lonrho 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 . .
Cited – Marrinan 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. . .
Cited – Crofter 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 . .
Cited – Crofter 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 – . .
Cited – Allen 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 . .
Cited – Sorrell 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 . .
Cited – Hargreaves 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 . .
Cited – Quinn 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 . .
Cited – Douglas 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. . .
Cited – Snook 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 . .
Cited – Optigen 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 . .
Cited – Mogul 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.
Cited – Yukong 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 . .
Cited – Mbasogo, 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 . .
Cited – Regina 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 . .
Cited – Cutler 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 . .
Cited – Rookes 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 . .
Cited – Daily 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 . .
Doubted – Michaels 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 . .
Cited – Surzur 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 . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Goldblatt 1972
In a winding up case, the Commissioners can if necessary proceed against a receiver for misfeasance. . .
Cited – Ex 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. . .
Cited – RCA 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 . .
Cited – W 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 . .
Cited – Oren, 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 . .
Cited – Regina 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. . .
Cited – Metall 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 . .
Cited – Rex v Bainbridge 1782
. .
Cited – Regina 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. . .
Cited – Woolwich 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. . .
Cited – Deutsche 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 . .
Cited – Commissioners 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 . .
Cited – Henderson 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 . .
Cited – Marcic 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 . .
Cited – Johnson 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 . .
Cited – Shiloh 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 . .
Cited – MacNiven (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:
Cited – Child 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 . .
Cited – Digicel (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 . .
Cited – Mobilx 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 . .
Cited – The 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 . .
Applied – The 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 . .
Cited – The 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 . .
Cited – JSC 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

Direktor Na Direktsia v Orfey Balgaria Eood: ECJ 19 Dec 2012

dndirektsia_obeECJ2012

ECJ VAT – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 63, 65, 73 and 80 – Establishment by natural persons of a building right in favour of a company in exchange for construction services by that company for those persons – Barter contract – VAT on construction services – Chargeable event – When chargeable – Payment on account of the entire consideration – Payment on account – Basis of assessment for a transaction in the event of consideration in the form of goods or services – Direct effect

C Toader, acting P
C-549/11, [2012] EUECJ C-549/11
Bailii
Directive 2006/112/EC

European, VAT, Construction

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.468764

Argos Distributors v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: ECJ 24 Oct 1996

VAT was payable on the value of a discount voucher only, and not on the full price of the goods. ‘According to the court’s settled case law, the taxable amount for the supply of goods or services is represented by the consideration actually received for them.’ VAT had been charged on vouchers on a basis inconsistent with Community law. The reference raised no question about whether the same could be said about teacakes: ‘There is only one difference between the early vouchers claim and the [late vouchers and teacakes] claims; as regards the early vouchers claim, the national legislation itself contravened the Directive, whereas with respect to the other two claims that legislation was unimpeachable in itself but was misapplied. Yet the end result in the two instances was precisely the same: the Directive was breached . . ‘ and ‘It is manifestly clear from the documents before the court that, in regard to both teacakes and gift vouchers after August 1992, the commissioners applied national tax legislation in a manner inconsistent with the directive.’

Advocate General Geelhoed
Times 18-Nov-1996, C-288/94, [1996] STC 1359, [1996] ECR I-5311, [1996] EUECJ C-288/94, [1997] QB 499
Bailii
Cited by:
Cited – Nell Gwynn House Maintenance Fund v Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 15-Dec-1998
Trustees who managed a group of apartments argued that they did not themselves provide staff services to the tenants, but rather arranged for the staff to provide services to them.
Held: The contract providing cleaning and other services, by a . .
Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 28-Jul-2005
The claimant had sought repayment of overpaid VAT, and the respondent resisted arguing that this would be an unjust enrichment. A reference to the European Court was sought.
Held: It was not possible to say that the House’s opinion was acte . .
Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 4-Feb-2009
The taxpayer requested refund of VAT overpaid on chocolate covered cakes. The CandE resisted saying that the money had been substantially already paid by its customers. The case had been referred twice to the ECJ, who answered that the maintenance . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.161452

Wolfgang und Dr. Wilfried Rey Grundstucksgemeinschaft Gbr v Finanzamt Krefeld: ECJ 9 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax – Directive 77/388/EEC – Third subparagraph of Article 17(5) – Field of application – Deduction of input tax – Goods and services used for both taxable and exempt transactions (mixed-use goods and services) – Determination of the assignation of goods and services purchased for the construction, use, conservation and maintenance of a building that serves to carry out, in part, transactions in respect of which VAT is deductible and, in part, transactions in respect of which VAT is not deductible – Amendment of the national legislation laying down the method of calculating the deductible proportion – Article 20 – Adjustment of deductions – Legal certainty – Legitimate expectations

C-332/14, [2016] EUECJ C-332/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:417
Bailii
Directive 77/388/EEC 17(5)

European, VAT

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.565637

X v Skatteverket: ECJ 6 May 2010

ECJ Value-added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Intra-Community acquisition of a new sailing boat – Use of goods in the State of origin or another Member State before being transported to the Member State of destination – Period of time for commencement of transport to the State of destination – Material time for determination as a new means of transport.

C-84/09, [2010] EUECJ C-84/09 – O
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – X v Skatteverket 18-Nov-2010
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.410791

Martland v The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs (Tax): UTTC 1 Jun 2018

Exercise of Discretion to hear Late Appeals

Excise Duty – assessment to duty and wrongdoing penalty – application for permission to make late appeal – test to be applied – appeal dismissed
The tribunal discussed the jurisdiction of the First Tier Tribunal to allow an appeal to be made after the statutory time limit: ‘In deciding whether or not to permit a late appeal, the FTT is exercising a discretion specifically and directly conferred on it by statute to permit an appeal to come into existence at all. It is not exercising some case management discretion in the conduct of an extant appeal. . . it is not appropriate to regard the exercise of the discretion as involving a direct application of Rule 2 of the FTT Rules (Rule 2 being concerned with ‘dealing with a case fairly and justly’ in relation to the various procedural matters identified in it – i.e. once proceedings have been properly commenced before the FTT). Nor, it will be noted, does Rule 20 apply to such matters (merely requiring that a late notice of appeal must contain a request for permission pursuant to the relevant enactment, and stating that the appeal must not be admitted unless permission is granted). That said, as will become apparent below, the principle embodied in the overriding objective is a broad one, and one which applies just as much to the exercise of a judicial discretion of the type involved in this appeal as it does to the exercise of such a discretion in relation to more routine procedural matters.’

[2018] UKUT 178 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Romasave (Property Services) Ltd v Revenue and Customs UTTC 27-May-2015
Existence of Discretion to hear late Appeal
VAT – whether assessments were duly notified to the taxpayer – VATA 1994, s 73(2), s 83G and s 98 – Interpretation Act, s 7 – Companies Act 2006, s 1139(1) – whether notification of assessment invalidated by error on the face of the notice of . .

Cited by:
Cited – Moss, Executor of David Owen (Deceased) v Revenue and Customs (Whether To Give Permission for Late Appeal To Be Made To HMRC – Martland – Inheritance Tax) FTTTx 11-Nov-2019
PROCEDURE – whether to give permission for late appeal to be made to HMRC – Martland – Inheritance Tax . .
Cited – Swallow v Revenue and Customs (Late Appeal – Martland Considered) FTTTx 23-Jan-2020
LATE APPEAL – Martland considered – length of delay is serious and significant – no good reason for delay – in all the circumstances fairness and justice do not support an extension of time — application refused . .
Cited – Murgasanu v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 10-Oct-2020
INCOME TAX – permission to make late appeal – finding of fact that appellant had not filed the return on paper within the time limit – relevant case law on late appeals considered and applied – permission refused . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.617298

Finanzamt Gummersbach v Bockemuhl: ECJ 1 Apr 2004

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Interpretation of Article 18(1) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Conditions for exercise of the right to deduct input VAT – Recipient of a service referred to in Article 9(2)(e) of the Sixth VAT Directive – Supply of staff by a taxable person established abroad – Recipient liable for VAT as the person to whom the supply was made – Requirement to hold an invoice – Content of the invoice

C-90/02, [2004] EUECJ C-90/02, [2006] BVC 95, [2004] CEC 303, [2004] 3 CMLR 5, [2004] ECR I-3303, [2006] BTC 5026, [2005] STC 934, [2004] STI 988
Bailii
European

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.195726

HMRC v London Clubs Management Limited: UTTC 5 Oct 2010

UTTC VALUE ADDED TAX – residual input tax – partial exemption – whether floor area based new special method advanced by the casino taxpayer should be rejected in favour of old turnover based special – no – appeal dismissed

Proudman J
[2010] UKUT 365 (TCC), [2010] STI 2921, [2010] BVC 1563, [2010] STC 2789
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.428172