Latest Cases

Value added tax – Recovery of tax. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (the tribunal) allowed the appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against a decision of the First-Tier tribunal (Tax Chamber) to the effect that the taxpayer was entitled to a refund of VAT claimed under s 35(4) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 incurred in connection with the construction of a building for use as a dwelling. The tribunal decided that condition 4 of the planning consent had prohibited the separate use of the building with the result that the building was not 'designed as a dwelling' for the purposes of s 35(1A) of the Act and Note 2(c) of Group 5 of Sch 8 to the Act. Consequently, its construction did not attract a refund of VAT pursuant to s 35(1) of the Act. 

European Union – Social security. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling deciding that art 5(a) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 should be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, old-age benefits provided under an occupational pension scheme of one member state and those provided under a statutory pension scheme of another member state - both schemes being within the scope of that regulation - were equivalent benefits within the meaning of that provision, where both categories of benefits had the same aim of ensuring that their recipients maintained a standard of living commensurate with that which they had enjoyed prior to retirement. 

Customs and Excise – Excise duty. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) allowed the appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)(the FTT) upholding the taxpayer's appeal against an assessment to duty raised by the Revenue on the basis that, in contravention of various provisions of the Hydrocarbon Oils Duties Act 1979, he had wrongfully used rebated fuel in a tractor. The tribunal decided that by failing to take steps to initiate condemnation proceedings, the taxpayer had caused the tractor to be 'duly condemned' with the effect that the deeming provision in para 5 of Sch 3 to the Customs & Excise Management Act 1970 did apply. 

Criminal law – Sexual activity. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, held that a total sentence of 8 months' detention in a young offender institution, suspended for 18 months, for three counts of sexual activity with a child, contrary to s 9(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, had not been unduly lenient. The judge had not erred in his finding that 'grooming' had not occurred. 

Income tax – Tax advantage. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimants' application for judicial review of the defendant Revenue and Customs Commissioner's decisions to limit the benefits available to them under the Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility in relation to their employee benefit trust schemes. The decisions were not conspicuously unfair and the Revenue had taken account of all relevant considerations. There had been no abuse of power or error of law. 

Town and country planning – Permission for development. The Planning Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant local planning authority's decision, under s 70C of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, declining to determine his application for planning permission of a change of use of a site for a single Gypsy and Traveller residential pitch and associated development until May 2018. On its proper interpretation, The power conferred by s 70C of the Act applied to the application for planning permission. 

Misrepresentation – Damages. The Chancery Division held that, in the course of the purchase of office buildings, misrepresentations had been made to the claimant companies by individuals acting for the defendant company. The claimants were entitled to the return of their deposit, and to damages for the tort of deceit. 

Contract – Sale of goods. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal in respect of his claim brought against the defendant Porsche dealer for damages for breach of an agreement to sell a limited edition vehicle, subject only to a condition that a vehicle be allocated to the defendant, and awarded him damages of £35,000. If there was an agreement for the sale of a vehicle to the claimant, and if there had been a collateral contract that the claimant would be first in the queue if Porsche supplied one to the defendant, the defendant had been in breach of contract when it had sold the one vehicle it had been allocated to someone else. 

Family proceedings – Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court, followings allegations of sexual abuse by a child B against her father, made findings of fact following an application by the local authority. Despite poor contemporaneous recording of B's evidence, the court concluded that B had been abused as she had alleged as she had spoken of things she could not know about at her age unless either it had happened to her or she had seen it or someone had told her about it. 

Medical practitioner – Professional conduct committee. The Fitness to Practise Panel (the panel) of the respondent General Medical Council found that the appellant doctor's fitness to practise was impaired and imposed a sanction of erasure from the medical register. The appellant appealed on the ground that the sanction was disproportionate. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the panel's determination was unimpeachable. It had come to a conclusion that it had been entitled to on the evidence before it and had provided adequate reasoning for the task which it had had to discharge.