Chester City Council & Chester City Transport v Arriva plc, Arriva Cymru Limited & Arriva North-West Limited

The High Court has just considered the application of Chapter II of the Competition Act 1998 in the context of the bus industry and, in particular, in relation to allegations of ‘predatory pricing’ and ‘flooding the market’. In dismissing the action, Rimer J held that the claimants had failed to show that Arriva was dominant in the relevant market.

High Court Damages Ruling in Hit-and-Run Case

Byrne v Motor Insurers Bureau / Secretary of State for Transport [2007] EWHC 1268 (QB)

In Byrne v Motor Insurers Bureau / Secretary of State for Transport, Flaux J has made the rare finding that the United Kingdom has committed a sufficiently serious breach of Community law to give rise to Francovich damages liability.

Fairness in Context

Abbey Mine Limited v The Coal Authority [2007] EWHC 1189 (Admin)

The application of rules of procedural fairness to the decision-making and review procedures of the Coal Authority was considered by the Administrative Court in Abbey Mine Limited v The Coal Authority. 


Newcastle United Plc. v. HMRC [2007] EWHC 612 (Ch)

First published by De Voil Indirect Tax Intelligence, Issue 131, April 2007

On 23rd February 2007 Mann, J. allowed an appeal by Newcastle United Plc, the owners of Newcastle United Football Club (“Newcastle United”).  He remitted the case for a retrial in the Tribunal.  The case concerned the deduction of input VAT on the fees paid by Newcastle United to football Players’ Agents when carrying on transactions relating to Players’ contracts, for example, in transfers or contract renegotiations.

Teleos plc and others v Commissioners of Customs & Excise (Case C-409/04) – Advocate General’s Opinion released on 11 January 2007

First published by De Voil Indirect Tax Intelligence, Issue 129, February 2007

In 2002 Teleos and other UK-based traders (together, ‘Teleos’) sold mobile phones ‘ex works’ to a Spanish company, ‘TT’.  Under the relevant supply contracts, Teleos were required to deliver the goods to the warehouse of TT’s forwarding agent in the UK. Thereafter, TT was responsible for the removal of the goods to Spain.  That removal was to have been physically effected by a carrier to whom the goods were to have been passed by the forwarding agent. Subsequent to each transaction, TT provided Teleos with a stamped and signed original CMR Note purporting to prove that the goods had reached their destination. On the application of Teleos, the supplies were zero rated by HMCE (as they then were) and input tax repayments authorised.

Makers v. OFT: Raising the Roof on Cartel Penalties

Makers v. OFT [2007] CAT 11 is another decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal arising out of the OFT’s investigations into bid-rigging in the roofing industry.  But the points it raises are of general importance on both liability and penalty.

Baxi Group Limited v HMRC [2006] EWHC 3353 (Ch)

First published by De Voil Indirect Tax Intelligence, Issue 129, February 2007

Baxi Group Limited, decided by Lindsay J in the High Court on 21 December 2006, is the latest in a series of cases concerning the question when a composite transaction will constitute a ‘single supply’ for VAT purposes.