In HMRC v Altrad Services Ltd and another [2024] EWCA Civ 720 (28 June) the Court of Appeal (CA) held that the correct purposive interpretation involved looking at the intention of the legislation as a whole rather than at a snapshot of each clause.
Altrad Services Ltd and Robert Wiseman and Sons Ltd took part in a marketed tax avoidance scheme designed to exploit the capital allowances rules applying in 2010 and 2011. (The law was subsequently amended by FA 2011 s 33 to make such arrangements ineffective.)
The scheme aimed to significantly increase the quantum of capital allowances available to the taxpayer companies via a sale and leaseback arrangement with a bank. The assets would be reacquired by the companies after a few weeks on the bank exercising a put option which each company had granted at the outset.
The intended outcome was that the companies would...
90a1d87b-c1b5-43c3-a720-cd324830adee.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=1b2d0a7e_1)
