Skatteforvaltningen v Solo Capital Partners LLP

Subject Matter

CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue laws — Jurisdiction to enforce — Foreign tax authority bringing private law claims against taxpayers in relation to wrongful tax refunds — Whether claims inadmissible as actions for enforcement of revenue laws of foreign state — Whether proceedings “civil and commercial matter” under European Regulation or Convention — Whether, if so, claims admissible — Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, art 1(1) — Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (2007), art 1(1)

[2021] EWHC 974 (Comm); [2021] 1 WLR 4237; [2021] STC 2395; [2021] WLR(D) 246, QBD

CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue law — Enforcement of — Foreign tax authority bringing claims to recover monies wrongfully paid out as tax refunds — Authority claiming that defendants fraudulently or negligently misrepresenting that refund due when no tax ever paid or even due — Whether claims inadmissible as actions for enforcement of revenue law of foreign state — Whether claims subject to European Regulation as “civil and commercial matters” — Parliament and Council Regulation (EU)No 1215/2012, art 1(1)

[2022] EWCA Civ 234; [2022] QB 772; [2022] 3 WLR 397; [2022] 2 All ER 563; [2022] STC 497; [2022] WLR(D) 107, CA

CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue law — Enforcement of — Foreign tax authority bringing claims to recover monies wrongfully paid out as tax refunds — Authority claiming that defendants fraudulently or negligently misrepresenting that refund due when no tax ever paid or due — Whether claims inadmissible as actions for enforcement of revenue law of foreign state

[2023] UKSC 40; [2024] AC 539; [2023] 3 WLR 886; [2024] 1 All ER 939; [2023] STC 1875; [2023] WLR(D) 470, SC(E)

Appellate History

Commentary

RPC Perspectives
Court of Appeal draws distinction between claims for recovery of tax and restitution for tax paid out fraudulently Case comment