![UT/2023/000115 - [2025] UKUT 00004 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_ICfrj4g.png){kind=logo}
Issues raised
Issues raised
The following issues arise in relation to Ground 2:
Is Item 1(c) ultra vires Article 132(1)(o)?
If it is ultra vires, is it possible to adopt a Marleasing interpretation of Item 1(c) which would result in it conforming with the PVD? In particular, were the conforming interpretations adopted by the FTT permissible under Marleasing principles?
If Item 1(c) is ultra vires the PVD but a conforming interpretation is not possible, does Article 132(1)(o) have direct effect?
- Heading
- Introduction
- factual background
- relevant legislation
- the decision and the grounds of appeal
- the eu law position in summary
- ground 1: item 1(b): an event “whose primary purpose is the raising of money”
- HMRC’s arguments
- Item 1(b):Approach to construction
- Discussion
- ground 2: item 1(c): an event “that is promoted as being primarily for the raising of money”
- HMRC’s arguments
- Relevant EU law principles
- Issues raised
- Is Item 1(c) ultra vires the PVD?
- A conforming interpretation of Item 1(c)
- Direct effect
- Conclusions