![[2024] UKUT 00152 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_ICfrj4g.png){kind=logo}
Heading
Appeal number: UT/2022/000144
INCOME TAX – meaning of Article 12(5) of the UK-Ireland double tax convention – whether the FTT erred in law in considering whether persons concerned in assignment of a debt claim had main purpose of taking advantage of Article 12(1) of the UK-Ireland double tax convention – no– appeal dismissed
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HIS MAJESTY’S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS | Appellants |
-and- BURLINGTON LOAN MANAGEMENT DAC | |
Respondent |
TRIBUNAL: | MR JUSTICE RICHARDS JUDGE ANDREW SCOTT |
Sitting in public at Rolls Building, Fetter Lane, London on 20 and 21 February 2024 with further written submissions on 14 March 2024
John Brinsmead-Stockham KC and Edward Hellier, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor for His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs, for the Appellants
Sam Grodzinski KC, instructed by Simmons & Simmons LLP, for the Respondent
DECISION
- Heading
- Introduction
- The relevant provisions of the UK-Ireland treaty
- The FTT’s findings of primary fact
- The FTT’s factual findings as to the knowledge of BLM and SICL
- The FTT’s conclusions
- The Grounds of Appeal and Respondent’s Notice
- Ground 1: meaning of Article 12(5) of UK-Ireland treaty
- The Respondent’s Notice
- HMRC’s Ground 1
- Grounds 2 to 4: introduction
- Ground 2: the FTT overlooked the UK WHT arbitrage
- Ground 3: specific errors of law in determining BLM’s purpose
- Ground 4: specific errors of law in determining SICL’s purpose
- Conclusions