In Farnborough Airport Properties Company and another v HMRC [2019] EWCA Civ 118 (8 February 2019) the Court of Appeal found that the appointment of a receiver had the effect of degrouping a company for group relief purposes.
The appellants (referred to collectively as ‘Farnborough’) were each at least 75% subsidiaries of Kelucia (‘KL’) as was Piccadilly Hotels 2 (‘PH2L’). HMRC had disallowed Farnborough’s claims for group relief of over £10.5m under CTA 2010 s 154 in relation to losses surrendered by PH2L on the ground that PH2L had ceased to be a member of the same group of companies as Farnborough as a result of the appointment of receivers over PH2L. The issue was therefore whether the appointment of the receivers had the effect of degrouping PH2L and Farnborough.
The Court of...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In Farnborough Airport Properties Company and another v HMRC [2019] EWCA Civ 118 (8 February 2019) the Court of Appeal found that the appointment of a receiver had the effect of degrouping a company for group relief purposes.
The appellants (referred to collectively as ‘Farnborough’) were each at least 75% subsidiaries of Kelucia (‘KL’) as was Piccadilly Hotels 2 (‘PH2L’). HMRC had disallowed Farnborough’s claims for group relief of over £10.5m under CTA 2010 s 154 in relation to losses surrendered by PH2L on the ground that PH2L had ceased to be a member of the same group of companies as Farnborough as a result of the appointment of receivers over PH2L. The issue was therefore whether the appointment of the receivers had the effect of degrouping PH2L and Farnborough.
The Court of...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes: