Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
EXCISE DUTY � seizure of vehicles � whether decisions not to restore were unreasonable � jurisdiction of Tribunal where points not raised by appellant � appeals dismissed
Sitting in public at Taylor House, 88 Rosebery Avenue, London on 5 December 2017
Mr Michael Newbold of Counsel, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor to the Home Office, for the Respondents
Zian Continental SRL (�the Company�) appealed against the Border Force�s refusal to restore two lorries, with registration numbers CJO5 ZAN (�the First Lorry�) and CJO3 ZAN (�the Second Lorry�), together �the Lorries�.� The two decisions were made and appealed separately but have been heard together.�
The Tribunal�s jurisdiction is limited in restoration appeals such as this.� It cannot order restoration, but if it decides that the Border Force�s decision(s) were unreasonable, it can direct that the Border Force make new decision(s), taking into account new, further or different points.�
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.