Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

COURT-OF-APPEAL


The Court of Appeal judgment restores order, write Sarah Bond and Helen Buchanan (Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer).
Pensions funds, Reemtsma claims and supplies by NHS trusts are among the topics in this month’s VAT review by Jo Crookshank and Gary Barnett (Simmons & Simmons).
Court of Appeal rejects SDLT scheme.
The Supreme Court has effectively left it open to future courts to counteract artificial avoidance, writes Ben Elliott (Pump Court Tax Chambers).
The characterisation test for VAT has received important clarification from the Court of Appeal, writes Michael Thomas KC (Pump Court Tax Chambers).
The Ministry of Justice’s claims that the Court of Appeal is being overwhelmed by vexatious litigants are not well founded in the context of tax, as Hartley Foster and George Gillham (Fieldfisher) explain.
A recent Court of Appeal decision reaffirms HMRC’s right to conduct enquiries on an ‘informal’ premise even where there is no statutory basis, write Kate Ison and Jessica Hocking (Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner).
The role of the Upper Tribunal (UT) in tax appeals has assumed an increased importance, writes Hui Ling McCarthy (11 New Square).
 
Etienne Wong (Old Square Tax Chambers) considers the state of VAT bad debt relief in the UK and its relationship to EU law in the light of the recent Court of Appeal judgment in HMRC v GMAC.
 

Robert Waterson (RPC) reviews guidance from the Court of Appeal on the meaning of ‘sham’.

EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top