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

For the dividend entitlement and dividend payment representations, SKAT said Mr Shah had admitted in cross-examination an understanding that the Solo Model CANs conveyed that the client had been entitled to the gross dividend amount stated and had received a payment in the net amount stated. Again, I consider that a fair characterisation of his evidence; but again, that is not the representation alleged, the essence of which is a statement about effects under Danish tax law. (For completeness, I should note that on one occasion, when asked about a West Point CAN, Mr Shah said “Yes, correct” when it was put to him that he “understood this to be conveying that the client was therefore entitled to a gross dividend in the stated amount as a matter of Danish tax law?”, but I do not believe he caught the final few words of that question when giving that answer.) His consistent evidence, in my judgment credible evidence despite my general concerns about him as a witness, was that he did not think anything was being said to SKAT about the content, effect or application to the facts of Danish tax law.