- Anglia Ruskin Students’ Union ran a bar or cafe called 92 at Anglia Ruskin University.
- The High Court refused the Union’s application for judicial review of HMRC’s decision that 92 was a ‘bar’ and therefore did not qualify for an extra-statutory concession.
- The concession does not cover food and drink sold by bars.
- The Union argued that ‘bar’ means a place that does not supply catering or predominantly serves alcohol.
- The Court accepted HMRC’s argument that a bar is “somewhere where one can buy and drink alcoholic and other drinks, as well as food”.
- The Court rejected the Union’s second ground of appeal, which was that HMRC’s policy is irrational, based on difference of treatment.
- 92 was treated the same way as other cafes and bars in the vicinity of the university.
- The Court considered both permission to appeal and the substantive case together, and found in favour of HMRC.
Source: taxscape.deloitte.com
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
