This morning the Supreme Court delivered a decision that dismissed the De Silva appeal.
De Silva had appealed that HMRC had used an incorrect enquiry process to invalidate his claim and that his claim should stand. The Supreme Court ruled that HMRC had, in his specific circumstances, acted lawfully.
The Supreme Court also ruled that the Cotter case gives no support to the taxpayers in this appeal, De Silva and those stood behind De Silva.
The LTAG team will be reviewing the judgement with legal counsel in great detail to determine its application to the range of fact patterns LTAG claimants have. We would expect to be in a position to provide guidance to LTAG members in two weeks.
On November 1st the Supreme Court delivered a final judgement on the long-running case between Littlewoods and HMRC. That case was heard at the Supreme Court in mid-July.
The case related to whether or not over-payments of VAT made by Littlewoods to HMRC, and then refunded by HMRC, should attract simple or compound interest in addition to the capital refunded. The difference to Littlewoods being nearly £1 billion.
The Littlewoods case referred to a number of prior UK & EU cases that it felt showed precedent supporting their case.
The Nov 1st 2017 Supreme Court judgement sided against Littlewoods.
It confirmed that the law in the UK has always been totally clear that interest paid and demanded by HMRC has always been simple interest and not compound interest. It also confirmed that there are no EU laws that override UK laws in regards of payments made by or requested by sovereign government tax agencies.
At LTAG we see this as yet another high profile example of where the law courts do enforce the word of the law where it is abundantly clear what the law says.
We believe the LTAG case is similarly binary. HMRC are, or are not in time to recover repayments made according to statutory limitations.
Today the Supreme Court heard the claim raised by a Mr De Silva (and others) to determine whether HMRC are entitled to enquire into his claim for loss relief other than by opening an enquiry under Schedule 1A of TMA 1970 which is subject to a time limit that had elapsed prior to the date of the enquiry.
The claim was heard by Lord Neuberger, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes and Lord Hodge. Fuller details as well as the ability to watch the hearing can be reviewed at www.supremecourt.uk/current-cases/ and search on De Silva.
The LTAG officers were in attendance. From a wide number of perspectives we believe that the De Silva hearing assisted the LTAG claim. In the next few weeks LTAG members will be provided with an update on the LTAG claim.
At this point there are no further timing related claims that are scheduled in the court diaries so LTAG will be the next claim to be heard.
Please contact us if you are in one of the potentially affected LLPs we mention in earlier posts.