Taxation logo taxation mission text

Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

No scope to rule

06 January 2015
Issue: 4483 / Categories: Tax cases , VAT

General Healthcare Group (TC4176)

The taxpayer company asked that the First-tier Tribunal should not be bound by the decision of the tribunal in lead case Nuffield Health (TC2697) in deciding an appeal on the degree of patient choice of prosthesis.

The business accepted that the facts in its own case were not materially different from those in Nuffield but said the tribunal in that appeal “appeared to have adopted the factual premise that it was Nuffield rather than the consultant who exercised the choice about what… to supply”.

The decision ignored the fact the consultant chose the prosthesis and installed it. In essence the tribunal had not considered the correct facts when applying the law.

The judge in the instant case noted that the lead direction concerned law rather than fact: the tribunal in Nuffield had erred in law because it had not taken into account relevant facts.


If you or your firm subscribes to, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or '' for further assistance.

back to top icon