Knowledge

Investment Trust Companies (in liq) v HM Revenue and Customs

Source đź“ť

94:
Henderson J held that the HMRC was enriched by the full VAT amount at the expense of the ITCs. The unjust factor was the mistake of law that the VAT was due, and there was a causal link between the mistake, the payments and the Commissioners’ enrichment. But the claims were all barred by VATA 1994
74:
from the HMRC. The managers usually got paid by fees plus VAT. It was thought that there was no exemption possible, and VAT was charged at a standard rate. But then, the ECJ said in 2007, the services should have been exempted from VAT since 1 January 1990. The litigation had begun in 2004, and at
85:
UKHL 2, more refund claims were allowed going back to 4 December 1996. ITC claimed they had a remedy for restitution, that this claim was not excluded by the VATA 1994 section 80(7), and that EU law gave an effective right to reimbursement.
81: 79:
section 80(4) installed a three year limitation period. HMRC repaid net amounts (because s 80(2A) required a set off from deductions of input tax already made for supplying services). After
70:
The Investment Trust Companies (ITC), closed-end investment trusts that got investment management services from management companies, sued to recover overpaid
303: 244: 367: 159: 95:
section 80(7), whose purpose was a strict time limit. As end users of management services, ITC could have rights under EU law, following
75:
that point, the managers claimed VAT refunds from 2001 to 2004. The claims were not made for earlier accounting periods because the
377: 142: 215: 230: 372: 203: 188: 273: 338: 327: 59: 173: 315: 258: 135: 62:
case, concerning to what extent enrichment of the defendant must be at the expense of the claimant.
76: 128: 220: 8: 293: 288: 278: 109: 193: 263: 178: 103:. There should be a direct remedy, but subject to limitation defences. These were 361: 120: 234: 82:
Fleming (t/a Bodycraft) v Customs and Excise Commissioners
107:
claims, and there was no need to confine the claimant to
71: 359: 136: 161:BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt (No 2) 143: 129: 246:Banque Belge pour l’Etranger v Hambrouck 150: 360: 216:Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Ltd 231:Kingstreet Invest Ltd v New Brunswick 124: 204:Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Birmingham CC 189:Trustee of FC Jones and Son v Jones 13: 368:English unjust enrichment case law 14: 389: 274:Investment Trust Companies v HMRC 55:Investment Trust Companies v HMRC 21:Investment Trust Companies v HMRC 279:[2012] EWHC 458 (Ch) 378:2012 in United Kingdom case law 1: 349: 339:English unjust enrichment law 328:English unjust enrichment law 60:English unjust enrichment law 174:Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd 7: 373:High Court of Justice cases 316:Brown and Davis v Galbraith 294:[2014] EWCA Civ 360 259:FII Group Litigation v HMRC 116: 89: 10: 394: 324: 312: 300: 285: 270: 255: 241: 227: 212: 200: 185: 170: 156: 46: 41: 33: 25: 20: 344: 194:[1996] EWCA 1324 77:Value Added Tax Act 1994 65: 47:Expense of the claimant 264:[2012] UKSC 19 179:[1988] UKHL 12 221:[2001] HCA 68 58:EWHC 458 (Ch) is an 289:Relfo Ltd v Varsani 151:Sources for expense 110:Francovich v Italy 334: 333: 51: 50: 385: 247: 162: 145: 138: 131: 122: 121: 18: 17: 393: 392: 388: 387: 386: 384: 383: 382: 358: 357: 352: 347: 335: 330: 320: 308: 296: 281: 266: 251: 245: 237: 223: 208: 196: 181: 166: 160: 152: 149: 119: 92: 68: 12: 11: 5: 391: 381: 380: 375: 370: 356: 355: 351: 348: 346: 343: 342: 341: 332: 331: 325: 322: 321: 313: 310: 309: 301: 298: 297: 286: 283: 282: 271: 268: 267: 256: 253: 252: 242: 239: 238: 228: 225: 224: 213: 210: 209: 201: 198: 197: 186: 183: 182: 171: 168: 167: 157: 154: 153: 148: 147: 140: 133: 125: 118: 115: 91: 88: 67: 64: 49: 48: 44: 43: 39: 38: 35: 31: 30: 27: 23: 22: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 390: 379: 376: 374: 371: 369: 366: 365: 363: 354: 353: 340: 337: 336: 329: 323: 318: 317: 311: 306: 305: 304:Butler v Rice 299: 295: 291: 290: 284: 280: 276: 275: 269: 265: 261: 260: 254: 249: 248: 240: 236: 233: 232: 226: 222: 218: 217: 211: 206: 205: 199: 195: 191: 190: 184: 180: 176: 175: 169: 164: 163: 155: 146: 141: 139: 134: 132: 127: 126: 123: 114: 112: 111: 106: 102: 98: 87: 84: 83: 78: 73: 63: 61: 57: 56: 45: 40: 37:EWHC 458 (Ch) 36: 32: 28: 24: 19: 16: 314: 302: 287: 272: 257: 243: 229: 214: 207:4 All ER 733 202: 187: 172: 158: 108: 104: 100: 96: 93: 80: 69: 54: 53: 52: 15: 105:San Giorgio 362:Categories 350:References 29:High Court 319:1 WLR 997 113:damages. 307:2 Ch 277 250:1 KB 321 165:2 AC 352 117:See also 101:Reemtsma 90:Judgment 42:Keywords 34:Citation 235:1 SCR 3 97:Danfoss 345:Notes 292: 277: 262: 219: 192: 177: 66:Facts 26:Court 326:See 99:and 72:VAT 364:: 144:e 137:t 130:v

Index

English unjust enrichment law
VAT
Value Added Tax Act 1994
Fleming (t/a Bodycraft) v Customs and Excise Commissioners
Francovich v Italy
v
t
e
BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt (No 2)
Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd
[1988] UKHL 12
Trustee of FC Jones and Son v Jones
[1996] EWCA 1324
Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Birmingham CC
Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Ltd
[2001] HCA 68
Kingstreet Invest Ltd v New Brunswick
1 SCR 3
Banque Belge pour l’Etranger v Hambrouck
FII Group Litigation v HMRC
[2012] UKSC 19
Investment Trust Companies v HMRC
[2012] EWHC 458 (Ch)
Relfo Ltd v Varsani
[2014] EWCA Civ 360
Butler v Rice
Brown and Davis v Galbraith
English unjust enrichment law
English unjust enrichment law
Categories

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑