Heading

Case Number: TC09657
Taylor House, London
Appeal reference: TC/2017/03077,03080,03081
TC/2019/00597,00599,00601
CUSTOMS DUTY – preliminary issues – (1) Where reliance needs to be placed on Article 221(4) of the Community Customs Code before a customs debt can be notified, on whom does the burden of proof lie? – (2) If HMRC notify a customs debt to a person who was not the “declarant” on the corresponding customs declaration, does the Tribunal have power under section 16(5) of the Finance Act 1994 to make a different person, who is party to proceedings before it and who was the declarant, liable to pay that debt?
Heard on: 17-18 July 2026
Written submissions: various dates up to 19 September2026
Judgment date: 9 October 2025
Before
TRIBUNAL JUDGE MARK BALDWIN
Between
UNIVERSAL CYCLES LIMITED
BRANDS HOLDINGS LIMITED
SPORTSDIRECT.COM RETAIL LIMITED
Appellants
and
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HIS MAJESTY’S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS
Respondents
Representation:
For the Appellant: Valentina Sloane KC of counsel, instructed by Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP
For the Respondents: Isabel McArdle and Gideon Barth of counsel, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor to HM Revenue and Customs
DECISION
- Heading
- Introduction
- The Customs Duty Framework
- The Parties
- The Bicycles
- The OLAF Investigation
- The C18 Post-Clearance Demand Notes
- The Burden of Proof Issue
- Unitrading Ltd v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Case C-437/13) (“Unitrading”)
- Greencarrier Freight Services Latvia SIA v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (Case C-571/12) (“Greencarrier”)
- Beemsterboer Coldstore Services BV v Inspecteur der Belastingdienst - Douanedistrict Arnhem (Case C-293/04) (“Beemsterboer”)
- The Burden of Proof Issue: The Parties’ Arguments
- The Burden of Proof Issue: Discussion
- The Answer to the Burden of Proof Issue
- The Debtor Issue
- The Debtor Issue: The Parties’ Arguments
- Conclusions
![TC09657 - [2025] UKFTT 01208 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png)