The recovery of VAT on legal services in Praesto Consulting v HMRC: an analysis by 3PB Barrister Max Schofield
9th May 2019
3PB commercial barrister Max Schofield analyses the implications of the Court of Appeal’s judgment on Praesto Consulting v HMRC, in particular, when a company can reclaim the VAT for legal proceedings against its director.
Click here to read Max's article. This article was first published in the Tax Journal.
Related News
-
3PB Barristers (3 Paper Buildings) is delighted to announce that property, commercial and chancery barrister Thomas Talbot-Ponsonby will officially be appointed as a District Judge from Monday 6 January 2025. District Judge Talbot-Ponsonby will sit on the South Eastern Circuit and be based at the Slough Law Courts. Thomas was called to the Bar in 2011 and was appointed as a Deputy District Judge and a fee-paid Employment Judge in 2021. Before coming to the...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ (3 Paper Buildings) The Rt Hon Michael Tomlinson KC, Christopher Edwards and pupil barrister Emily Hayward have all contributed to the latest edition of ThoughtLeaders4 Disputes Magazine. The Rt Hon Michael Tomlinson KC is featured in this issue’s popular “60-Seconds With” segment in which industry experts answer a series of quick-fire questions, giving readers an insight into their thoughts on and beyond their work. In his interview, published on page 10, Michael discusses...
Continue reading -
3PB’s commercial and property barrister Alex Whatley will be speaking at the Civil Litigation Conference on the Thursday 27th March for the Bournemouth Law Society. The conference is taking place at The Carlton Hotel in Bournemouth. To book your ticket for this event, please click here. The cost is £100 for members and £150 for non-members. Alex Whatley is recommended in both Chambers and Partners UK and Legal 500 as a top commercial litigation barrister....
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ (3 Paper Buildings) specialist commercial, chancery and property barrister Alexander Whatley has written for LexisNexis on the case of R v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, which was brought to the Supreme Court to determine the correct characterisation of a contract. In his article, entitled “Amendments in retrospect – Repair or replace? (R v Revenue and Customs Commissioners)”, Alexander explores the legal distinctions between amendment, rescission and replacement, the relevant contextual considerations for the courts and...
Continue reading
