The Supreme Court was created to ensure greater transparency and independence in judicial decisions at the highest level. In its first ten years it has heard 45 tax cases many of which have significantly developed the law and practice in diverse areas. Where EU law is in point the Supreme Court has conscientiously applied EU principles and case law but added its own wisdom. The court has referred only two cases to the CJEU and refused to refer a number of others notably Aimia. A recurrent theme in the Supreme Court’s decisions is the need to adopt a purposive construction of taxing statutes. There has been a convergence in the judicial approach to artificial tax avoidance schemes whether involving direct or indirect taxes; and further convergence in cases involving remedies. The court has restated the law of restitution in the landmark decisions in Littlewoods...
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
The Supreme Court was created to ensure greater transparency and independence in judicial decisions at the highest level. In its first ten years it has heard 45 tax cases many of which have significantly developed the law and practice in diverse areas. Where EU law is in point the Supreme Court has conscientiously applied EU principles and case law but added its own wisdom. The court has referred only two cases to the CJEU and refused to refer a number of others notably Aimia. A recurrent theme in the Supreme Court’s decisions is the need to adopt a purposive construction of taxing statutes. There has been a convergence in the judicial approach to artificial tax avoidance schemes whether involving direct or indirect taxes; and further convergence in cases involving remedies. The court has restated the law of restitution in the landmark decisions in Littlewoods...
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=df04ab27_1)
