Revenue and Customs & Anor v Ben Nevis (Holdings) Ltd & Ors [2012] EWHC 1807 (Ch) (20 July 2012)
Article 25A of the UK-RSA Double Tax Convention, as amended by the 2010 Protocol and given effect by Order in Council, applies to all revenue claims as defined, subject only to the qualifications within Article 25A and the requirement that requests for assistance are made after the Protocol's entry into force;...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] EWHC 1807 (Ch)
- Parties
- Claimant: Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs; Claimant: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service; Defendant: Ben Nevis (Holdings) Limited; Defendant: Metlika Trading Limited; Defendant: HSBC Trustee (Guernsey) Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 20 July 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Interlocutory Applications: Jurisdiction Challenge, Freezing Order Challenge
- Outcome
- Jurisdictional challenge dismissed; freezing order continued.
- Legal Topics
- Mutual Assistance in Tax Collection, Double Taxation Convention, Freezing Orders, Jurisdiction, Revenue Rule, Retrospectivity, Ultra Vires, Human Rights
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Claimant
Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
Claimant
Ben Nevis (Holdings) Limited
Defendant
Metlika Trading Limited
Defendant
HSBC Trustee (Guernsey) Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Applications: Jurisdiction Challenge, Freezing Order Challenge
Legal Issues
- 1 Does Article 25A of the UK-RSA Double Tax Convention permit enforcement of RSA tax debts in the UK for years prior to the Convention's entry into force?
- 2 Is the Order in Council giving effect to Article 25A ultra vires or impermissibly retrospective?
- 3 Is SARS properly a party to the proceedings?
Ratio Decidendi
Article 25A of the UK-RSA Double Tax Convention, as amended by the 2010 Protocol and given effect by Order in Council, applies to all revenue claims as defined, subject only to the qualifications within Article 25A and the requirement that requests for assistance are made after the Protocol's entry into force; Article 27 of the 2002 Convention does not limit the temporal scope of Article 25A; the Order in Council is not ultra vires and does not offend the presumption against retrospectivity; the jurisdictional challenge fails.
Court Disposition
Jurisdictional challenge dismissed; freezing order continued.
Orders
- Permission to serve out of jurisdiction confirmed.
- Tax Recovery Claim and IA Claim may proceed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment