The appeal hearing
The appeal hearing
At the commencement of the appeal hearing, Mr Starr submitted that whilst the Appellant had not provided any witness statements of witnesses to be called during the hearing, a presentation would be given by Mr Thomas Copsey. He added that the presentation had already been given to HMRC at the meeting that took place on 2 August 2022. Mr Waldegrave expressed no objections to the presentation to be given by Mr Copsey. Mr Waldegrave then handed up copies of the relevant parts of the UK Integrated Online Tariff, s 16 FA 1994 and Schedule 7 to the TCBTA. A double-sided wetsuit of the type whose classification was in dispute was also exhibited by HMRC.
Both representatives were in agreement that the following matters were not in issue between the parties:
The Wetsuits are “articles of apparel”.
The neoprene element of the panels on the Wetsuits constitutes “vulcanised rubber”.
The textile layers on the panels used to make the Wetsuits constitute “knitted fabric”.
The single-sided wetsuits fall under Heading 4015 of the UK Tariff.
Whilst Mr Starr accepted that the Wetsuits should be classified according to the material which conveys the “essential character” of the Wetsuits by the application of rule 3(b) of the GIRs, he also submitted that the Wetsuits could be classified with reference to Note (3) of Heading 40.15 of HSENs, without the need to go on to consider rule 3(b) of the GIRs.
We then heard the presentation from Mr Copsey.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Issue(s)
- Burden and standard of proof
- Authorities and documents
- Background facts
- Relevant law
- The appeal hearing
- Appellant’s evidence and submissions
- HMRC’s evidence and submissions
- Findings of fact
- The UK Tariff
- [Emphasis added]
- Sola Wetsuits
- The European Regulation
- Consideration
- Conclusions
![TC09362 - [2024] UKFTT 001071 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png)