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.
ANTI-DUMPING DUTY - post clearance demand note � fraudulent declaration of country of origin � remission of duty - error by customs authorities � no - good faith of importer � no � appeal dismissed
Sitting in public at 45 Bedford Square, London WC1 on 29 March to 1 April and on 16 September 2010
Kieron Beal, counsel, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor to HM Revenue and Customs, for the Respondents
Mr McNicholas represented FMX and Mr Beal represented HMRC. We heard oral evidence on behalf of FMX from its director Pierluigi Pignatelli and on behalf of HMRC from Guy Jennes, of the European Union's Anti Fraud Office ("OLAF"). In addition we had before us bundles of documents.
FMX's case was in essence that it had acted throughout in good faith, relying on its longstanding relationship with contacts in the region, and certification from the Kingdom of Cambodia's customs administration which was at all material times in full possession of the facts. FMX says that the Anti Dumping Duty charged on the imports should have been waived, since the conditions under Article 220(2)(b) of the Community Customs Code ("the Code") were met. FMX also seek to have the Anti-Dumping Duty remitted under Article 239 of the Code.
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.