CL-2018-000297, CL-2018-000404, CL-2018-000590, - [2025] EWHC 2364 (Comm)
Commercial Court

CL-2018-000297, CL-2018-000404, CL-2018-000590, - [2025] EWHC 2364 (Comm)

Fecha: 02-Oct-2025

C.5 The CANs

C.5 The CANs

112.

As indicated in Appendix 3, several custodians were variously involved in the different trading models: SCP in the Solo Model 2012/2013; SCP, Telesto, West Point and Old Park Lane in the Solo Model 2014/2015; Indigo and NCB in the Maple Point Model 2014; NCB and Lindisfarne in the Maple Point Model 2015; Salgado in the Klar Model. Every refund claim paid by SKAT and now a subject of these proceedings was supported by a CAN issued by one of those custodians. Any one refund claim sent to and paid by SKAT might have been for the aggregate of the amounts shown in several CANs submitted with a single Form. The 4,170 tax refund claims that between them form the subject matter of these proceedings are counted on the basis that one CAN equals one refund claim. The 4,170 tax refund claims, counted in that way, were thus constituted from fewer than 4,170 tax refund Forms submitted by the Tax Agents to SKAT over the period (the exact number does not matter).

113.

CAN formats differed between custodians, but the format used by any one custodian remained constant over time, save that in the case of CANs issued by SCP, initially only a “Pay Date” for the referenced dividend was given, whereas later SCP CANs gave its “Ex Date” and “Record Date” as well. An example of a CAN from each custodian (and in SCP’s case, one example of each type) appears in Appendix 5 to this judgment. Again I do not summarise their content further here because I examine it in more detail below, when judging whether any of the representations alleged by SKAT was made (and again, the ‘54-…’ and ‘SKSK…’ reference numbers are not original). However, I do note now that the form of CAN used by NCB stated that it was “Not a tax certificate” and contained some detailed terms on a second page (or in hard copy, it may have been, the reverse side of a standard form), some of which may have been meaningful only in relation to German securities. I have not included that page of ‘small print’ in Appendix 5.