The Company of Proprietors of Whitchurch Bridge, R (on the application of) v HM Treasury
Section 42 of the 1792 Act does not entitle the Company to relief from the economic burden of VAT, as it only exempts the Company from taxes for which it is directly liable; the Treasury is not obliged to admit the Company to the VAT refund scheme under section 33 of the 1994 Act, and the criteria applied by the Treasury are unobjectionable.
- Parties
- Claimant: The Company of Proprietors of Whitchurch Bridge; Defendant: HM Treasury
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 13 December 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- VAT Refunds, Statutory Interpretation, Tax Exemptions, Public Bodies, Discretionary Government Funding
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Company of Proprietors of Whitchurch Bridge
Claimant
HM Treasury
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether HM Treasury is obliged by law to admit the Company of Proprietors of Whitchurch Bridge to the VAT refund scheme under section 33 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994
- 2 Whether section 42 of the Whitchurch Bridge Act 1792 entitles the Company to relief from the economic burden of VAT
Ratio Decidendi
Section 42 of the 1792 Act does not entitle the Company to relief from the economic burden of VAT, as it only exempts the Company from taxes for which it is directly liable; the Treasury is not obliged to admit the Company to the VAT refund scheme under section 33 of the 1994 Act, and the criteria applied by the Treasury are unobjectionable.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
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