In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
Mr Justice Andrew Baker ruled that although the defendants acted with 'substantial greed' and 'pervasive dishonesty', SKAT could not prove fraud because it hadn’t relied on the alleged misrepresentations.
The judge criticised SKAT’s 'flimsy' review systems and noted its clerical approach meant no inducement occurred. The court confirmed the refund claims were invalid, but not deceitful, since participants didn’t knowingly mislead SKAT.
Gailani and Martin highlight that the ruling underscores the high evidential bar for proving fraud—even against sophisticated traders—and offers rare judicial guidance on 'systemic reliance' in complex financial litigation.
RELATED ARTICLES
