header-logo header-logo

Tax

31 March 2011
Issue: 7459 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Bayfine UK v HM Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2011] EWCA Civ 304, [2011] All ER (D) 266 (Mar)

The opening words of Art 1(4) of the US/UK Double Taxation Convention (the Treaty) (as set out in Pt I of Sch 1 to the Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income)) (The United States of America) Order 1980, (SI 1980/568) were intended to achieve a particular outcome and were not descriptive of the manner in which that outcome was to be achieved.

Under Art 1(3), a contracting state was entitled to depart from the Treaty, but only on terms that the specified outcome was attained. That outcome was that there should be no interference with the operation of certain articles, including Art 23. Since the focus was on outcome, and not on means of achieving that outcome, the expression had to be one which was capable of being achieved by different means according to the outcome.

The purpose of Art 23 was to eliminate double taxation and prevent fiscal evasion, which would include the avoidance of taxation. That latter purpose

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
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
back-to-top-scroll