Search
The Upper Tribunal (“UT”) overturned the First-Tier Tribunal’s (“FtT”) decision that SAE Education Ltd (“SEL”) was an eligible body for the purposes of Note(1)(b) to Item 1 of Group 6 of Schedule 9 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (“VATA”). In my view, it is strongly arguable that the UT erred in doing so. The UT construed Note (1)(b) strictly. That provision should have been construed purposively, as SEL argued.
Melanie Hall QC and Elizabeth Kelsey represented SAE Education Limited instructed by Gordon Dadds LLP.
Please click here to view the full case note.
This case note was written by Tarlochan Lall and first published in De Voil.
The comments made in this case note are wholly personal and do not reflect the views of any other members of Monckton Chambers, its tenants or clients.