The Littlewoods litigation continues the victorious advance of claimants seeking redress for the payment of undue VAT. In rejecting HMRC’s ingenious arguments, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that even a substantial payment of statutory interest may not always provide a substantive safeguard for a claimant’s EU law rights. Such rights must be asserted not by way of VATA 1994 but by a claim for restitution at common law. HMRC was not to be regarded as an involuntary recipient of VAT overpayments and, on the facts, was liable to restore the objectively-calculated benefit of the time value of the claimant’s money without any subjective devaluation of the claim. But, the battle continues…
The Littlewoods litigation continues the victorious advance of claimants seeking redress for the payment of undue VAT, writes Michael Conlon QC (Hogan Lovells).
The Littlewoods litigation continues the victorious advance of claimants seeking redress for the payment of undue VAT. In rejecting HMRC’s ingenious arguments, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that even a substantial payment of statutory interest may not always provide a substantive safeguard for a claimant’s EU law rights. Such rights must be asserted not by way of VATA 1994 but by a claim for restitution at common law. HMRC was not to be regarded as an involuntary recipient of VAT overpayments and, on the facts, was liable to restore the objectively-calculated benefit of the time value of the claimant’s money without any subjective devaluation of the claim. But, the battle continues…
The Littlewoods litigation continues the victorious advance of claimants seeking redress for the payment of undue VAT, writes Michael Conlon QC (Hogan Lovells).