Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Tel-Ka Talk Ltd v HMRC

Award of costs where solicitor working on contingency basis

In Tel-Ka Talk Ltd v HMRC (High Court Costs Office) a company (T) which traded in mobile telephones claimed a repayment of input tax. HMRC initially rejected the claim and T appealed. Following the ECJ decision in Optigen Ltd [2006] STC 419 HMRC withdrew their decision and made the repayment. T applied for costs. HMRC rejected the claim on the grounds that the solicitor who had represented T had being doing so on a contingency basis and that ‘contingency fees are not enforceable in the VAT and Duties Tribunal and indeed are illegal on the grounds of champerty’. Judge Hurst rejected this contention holding that the VAT Tribunal was not a ‘court’ for the purposes of Solicitors Act 1974 and that the contingency fee agreement was lawful. Judge Hurst specifically declined to follow the principles laid...

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:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top