PROFILE

Joseph joined JHA in August 2015 and became an Associate in December 2017. His practice covers a range of contentious matters, with a particular focus on direct tax issues and group litigation. He has represented clients at all levels of the UK courts and tax tribunals, including in several cases before the Supreme Court challenging the lawfulness of various UK corporate tax imposts. He has also acted in cases relating to the imposition of EU restrictive measures, and in general commercial disputes and investigations.

Alongside his contentious practice, Joseph advises clients on commercial contracts, intellectual property and corporate law issues, often involving a cross-border element.

Articles recently authored by Joseph include High Court rules on outstanding issues in the CFC & Dividend GLO, (Tax Journal); Jazztel plc v HMRC: High Court ruling in Stamp Taxes GLO, (CCH Daily incorporating Accountancy Live); and FII group litigation ruling on tax on foreign sourced dividends, (Tax Journal).

PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS

Admitted as a solicitor in England and Wales, 2017

EDUCATION

University of Law, London – LPC, (Distinction)

University of Liverpool – LLB, (First Class Honours)

RELATED ARTICLES

Jazztel plc v HMRC: High Court ruling in Stamp Taxes GLO

On 3 April 2017, Marcus Smith J delivered judgment in the High Court in Jazztel plc v HMRC [2017] EWHC 677 (Ch), the test case in the Stamp Taxes GLO. The claimant here sought recovery of UK stamp duty reserve tax (SDRT) that it had paid on the issue of shares to clearance houses and in exchange for depository receipts. First published in CCH Daily.

Read More

Investment Trust Companies v HMRC: Repayments of VAT

The case concerned claims made by certain investment trust companies (“ITCs”) for refunds of VAT which they had paid to investment managers on the supply of management services, which later turned out not to be due since the supplies in question were exempt under EU law. The Supreme Court held that the ITCs’ claims in respect of the input tax failed and that HMRC’s enrichment was limited to the amount which they had actually received from the investment managers. The enrichment did not include the amounts retained as input tax credits since the supplies should have been exempt, and so there had been no entitlement to deduct input VAT.

Read More

C-592/15 British Film Institute v HMRC

The CJEU held here, contrary to the decisions of the UK First-tier and Upper Tax Tribunals, that Article 13A(1)(n) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC, which exempts from VAT the provision of “certain cultural services… supplied by bodies governed by public law”, was not sufficiently clear and precise so as to have direct effect.

Read More
View All Articles