BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[CanPayButWouldRatherNot]

I might be wrong but this sounds more like the PwC case - Art 56 of the EU Treaty.

yes was pwc case and lots of references to articles and eu this and eu that ....

from what i could barely hear from the pwc silk ...

[SantaClaus]

Don't you mean in true HMRC style we're likley to get a decision on 24th December...just in time no doubt to ruin all festivities....!

Yep, and remind me to send Mr YouKnowWho a birthday card at his funeral

[SantaClaus]

yes was pwc case and lots of references to articles and eu this and eu that ....

from what i could barely hear from the pwc silk ...

Thanks for attending sir! Let's hope the judges can hear whats being said

[swede]

yes was pwc case and lots of references to articles and eu this and eu that ....

from what i could barely hear from the pwc silk ...

thanks a lot.

[SantaClaus]

When HMRC takes the witness stand, listen carefully... for you are almost certain to hear the words of well known songs.

Nope, Santa hasn't finally cracked under the pressure, read this:

Police gunman's 'song titles' probe over Mark Saunders inquest | News

[DonkeyRhubarb]

So if we don't win our case but Pwc win there's do we have scope to jump on their rulling?

Just wondered if both will be ruled on seperately since they are both different arguments.

It doesn't matter whether we win or PwC win. A win for either is a win for us all.

[Slobbo]

Other cases

Do we know anything about the other cases? i.e. the KPMG and Ernst and Young ones (I think). Can't find anything via Google.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Do we know anything about the other cases? i.e. the KPMG and Ernst and Young ones (I think). Can't find anything via Google.

Last time I spoke to Steed, who are represented by KPMG, they hadn't heard anything about their ECtHR application which was filed back in January 2009. This is not that surprising because there is an enormous backlog of applications at the court.

I heard about the E&Y action through a tip off but never managed to confirm any details. I don't know if there is any real substance to this.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

..
just back from the courtroom ...

our guy was discussing the IOM and its statehood ... part of a member state .. or a "3rd country" ... etc etc...he discussed the case of Jersey potatoes and a case that went through european law to determine Jerseys statehood ...

it ended nicely with the head judge determining that it was 1300 and all this talk of jersey potatoes had left him quit peckish .... and promptly left to return at 1400 ....

CPBWRN

I *think* this refers to a court case about levies imposed on the export of Jersey Royal spuds to the UK. The ruling found that for the purpose of movement of free capital and goods, Jersey was to be considered part of a member state of the EU under Protocol 3 to the Act of Accession annexed to the Treaty of
Accession 1972, Jersey and the IOM are to be treated as part of a member state and therefore not subject to restrictions on free movement of capital etc..

Or to put it another way, Hector can eat his Jersey Royals without paying extra for them via levies imposed on Jersey (tax etc) due to EU restrictions being imposed on Jersey. As the IOM falls into the same ruling of the above Act, then the IOM is allowed free movement of goods, capital etc under Article 56 of the EU Treaty and cannot be thwarted by Article 57 which allows member states rights of restriction of such free movements.

Right, off to buy some Jersey Royals and hope the Judges enjoyed them as much as I will...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Anyone going today?

I'm waiting for my contact to provide an update but, from the sound of it, the PwC presentation was very technical yesterday.