header-logo header-logo

10 September 2009
Issue: 7384 / Categories: Case law , Tax , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Value added tax

RCI Europe v Revenue and Customs Commissioners C-37/08 [2009] All ER (D) 25 (Sep)

The question arose as to which place was, within the meaning of Art 9(2)(a) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (on the harmonisation of the laws of the member states relating to turnover taxes—common system of value added tax:

uniform basis of assessment), the place of supply of the services provided by an association whose business consisted in organising the exchange between its members of their holiday usage rights in timeshare accommodation, in return for which that association received enrolment, annual subscription and exchange fees from its members.

The court ruled that the place would be where the property in respect of which the member concerned held timeshare usage rights was situated.

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll