header-logo header-logo

EU

22 July 2016
Issue: 7708 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Amoena (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2016] UKSC 41, [2016] All ER (D) 56 (Jul)

The Supreme Court, in allowing the taxpayer’s appeal in part, held, among other things, that, on a natural reading, a mastectomy bra imported by the taxpayer, designed to be worn with a silicone breast form by women who had undergone surgical removal of one or both breasts, was an “accessory”, which, by holding the breast form in place, enabled it to perform its function. The bra, therefore performed a particular service relative to the main function of the breast form and fell within the classification of “parts and accessories” in note 2(b) to Ch 90 of heading 9021 of the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union, such that it did not attract the payment of customs duty.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Pension sharing orders (PSOs) have quietly reached their 25th anniversary, yet remain stubbornly underused. Writing in NLJ this week, Joanna Newton of Stowe Family Law argues that this neglect risks long-term financial harm, particularly for women
A school ski trip, a confiscated phone and an unauthorised hotel-room entry culminated in a pupil’s permanent exclusion. In this week's issue of NLJ, Nicholas Dobson charts how the Court of Appeal upheld the decision despite acknowledged procedural flaws
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
back-to-top-scroll