Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

LITIGATION


Anastasia Nourescu and David Pickstone (Stewarts) consider the pitfalls of HMRC’s newly published ADR guidance and how taxpayers and advisers should approach ADR going forward.
Craig Kirkham-Wilson (Simmons & Simmons) reviews a recent decision of the Upper Tribunal on staleness and Supreme Court precedent.
Whilst taking professional advice will usually mean a taxpayer has taken reasonable care, not taking advice does not necessarily mean a taxpayer has been careless, write Adam Craggs and Constantine Christofi (RPC).

Folajimi FJ Akinla (PwC) reviews a recent CJEU ruling which curtails the DAC 6 notification obligation concerning certain tax planning cross-border arrangements. 

Paul Farey (AECOM) considers the impact of a Court of Appeal decision in the long-running Urenco capital allowances case.
Two recent cases provide a reminder of the extent to which taxation outcomes can depend on other areas of law and demonstrate that HMRC will not be limited to ‘pure’ tax law arguments on appeal, write Dominic Stuttaford and Aiden Hepworth (Norton Rose Fulbright).
Patrick Cannon (Cannon Chambers) examines a recent tribunal decision on self-assessed mixed-use SDLT and the broader issue of reliance on HMRC’s published guidance. 
This judgment deals a blow to the European Commission’s state aid investigations concerning tax rulings on transfer pricing, writes Pierre-Antoine Klethi and Peter Adriaansen (Loyens & Loeff).

Case law on discovery has continued to evolve after the Supreme Court’s judgment in Tooth, as Helen Adams (BDO) explains.

EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top