Europlus Trading Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2011] UKFTT 635 (TC) (28 September 2011)

Europlus Trading Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2011] UKFTT 635 (TC) (28 September 2011)

The appellant failed to satisfy the strict statutory requirement to prove duty had been paid, so the claim would fail under the letter of the law. However, the tribunal found that HMRC’s withdrawal of the 'relaxed' evidential approach without notice, after an established practice and in the absence of clear warning, was unacceptable and contravened EU law principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectations, and proportionality. The tribunal allowed the appeal on the basis that the claims should have been allowed in full due to the manner in which the evidential requirements were changed without notice.

Citation
[2011] UKFTT 635
Parties
Appellant: Europlus Trading Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
28 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax), Final Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty Drawback, Legitimate Expectations, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, European Law Direct Effect, Free Movement of Goods, Proportionality, Legal Certainty, Human Rights (a1 P1)
Tax Law European Union Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Excise Duty Drawback Legitimate Expectations Jurisdiction of Tribunal European Law Direct Effect +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Europlus Trading Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax), Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant satisfied the statutory conditions for excise duty drawback, specifically proof that duty had been paid and not previously refunded
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear a legitimate expectations argument (public law/judicial review)
  3. 3 Whether HMRC’s withdrawal of the 'relaxed' evidential approach without notice breached EU law principles (proportionality, legal certainty, legitimate expectations)

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to satisfy the strict statutory requirement to prove duty had been paid, so the claim would fail under the letter of the law. However, the tribunal found that HMRC’s withdrawal of the 'relaxed' evidential approach without notice, after an established practice and in the absence of clear warning, was unacceptable and contravened EU law principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectations, and proportionality. The tribunal allowed the appeal on the basis that the claims should have been allowed in full due to the manner in which the evidential requirements were changed without notice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • HMRC’s refusal of the appellant’s drawback claims is set aside; the claims should be allowed in full.