In Test Claimants in the Thin Cap Group Litigation v HMRC (Supreme Court – 28 June) the Supreme Court dismissed the claimants’ application for leave to appeal against the CA decision reported at [2011] STC 738 which is therefore final.
Following the ECJ decision in Case C-524/04 the case was referred back to the Ch D.
Henderson J reviewed the evidence in detail and delivered a lengthy judgment against which both sides appealed to the CA.
The CA allowed HMRC’s appeal and dismissed the claimants’ cross-appeal.
Stanley Burnton LJ expressed the opinion that it was ‘difficult to reconcile’ the ECJ judgment in ECJ Case C-524/04 with the subsequent judgment in Oy AA v Finland ECJ Case C-231/05.
He held that that case together with the subsequent decision in Société De Gestion Industrielle...
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 Test Claimants in the Thin Cap Group Litigation v HMRC (Supreme Court – 28 June) the Supreme Court dismissed the claimants’ application for leave to appeal against the CA decision reported at [2011] STC 738 which is therefore final.
Following the ECJ decision in Case C-524/04 the case was referred back to the Ch D.
Henderson J reviewed the evidence in detail and delivered a lengthy judgment against which both sides appealed to the CA.
The CA allowed HMRC’s appeal and dismissed the claimants’ cross-appeal.
Stanley Burnton LJ expressed the opinion that it was ‘difficult to reconcile’ the ECJ judgment in ECJ Case C-524/04 with the subsequent judgment in Oy AA v Finland ECJ Case C-231/05.
He held that that case together with the subsequent decision in Société De Gestion Industrielle...
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:
