Government wants 18,000 reasons for class action
The government yesterday fought back against the Labour Party's class action over VAT charged on vehicle registration by asking that each of the 18,000 people represented declare how they had been wronged.
The procedure means the case could turn into an unwieldy nightmare for Labour (PL) and lawyer Ian Refalo, representing the government together with Deputy Attorney General Peter Grech, insists there appear to be anomalies in the long list of people claiming compensation over the VAT they have been made to pay.
In particular, Prof. Refalo said yesterday there were some entries in which individuals were trying to claim the VAT back on behalf of companies and others where the complainants had purchased their car in 1996, which, he said, would disqualify them from making the claim.
The controversy over the VAT paid on car registration erupted last February when EU Taxation Commissioner Laszlo Kovacs said it was not in accordance with European community law.
The PL maintains this means that VAT on registration charged by the government after EU accession in 2004 is illegal and, therefore, should be refunded.
In the last budget, the tax regime changed and, since January 2009, VAT is no longer charged on registration tax of vehicles. But Labour is insisting the government should refund the €50 million it charged in the intervening period.
The PL said the lawyers representing the government had presented formalistic and procedural pleas that had already been presented in the government's original reply to the suit. Moreover, the party said that, in essence, the request meant that each case had to be heard separately, which would substantially increase the time taken for proceedings to take place.
Lawyers Anġlu Farrugia, the party's deputy leader, Chris Cilia and Alex Sciberras, appearing for the PL, argued that the procedures should be practical and should treat the merits of the case.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
7 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mark Galea
Jul 16th 2009, 08:15
@Galea. L
Why not ask the PL EU majority to solve the problem? Maybe they can press the right button and solve it.
Josianne Spiteri
Jul 15th 2009, 19:43
Didnt anyone buying a new car kow how much they were paying vat?They accepted to pay it so that should disualify them from any refund.Joseph allready said theyhe win or loose the case he is giving back the vat to those who paid it once he is a prime minister.Accusing PN of nt observing the laws!What about him not rspecting decisions of court.Why take the case in front of a court when you are allready saying I dont care what the court says.
acamilleri
Jul 15th 2009, 18:41
Why worry? Two can play that game
Come election time 18000 votes may be hard to get for some - maybe not for others
Jeff Aquilina
Jul 15th 2009, 15:27
Yes i agree with you Mr.Martinelli, but you say 4 years -and up, what if the person that put in a claim like myself as i believe its wrong to pay the excess for sheer greed, and then one kicks the bucket or as we say back home snuffs it, can we still or at least the family still left behind receive the FULL reimbursement with interest, as naturally bank interest in accumulating for the €50,Mill.
J Martinelli
Jul 15th 2009, 14:57
"Another fine mess" the PL landed into, but, what difference does time make for them since Joseph already declared that win or lose the court case, he will be paying the 18000 claims anyway when he becomes Prime Minister!?
What's another four years, or nine, or...?
Galea. L
Jul 15th 2009, 13:50
Usual PN tactics of trying to delay the inevitable.
It is the same court case with different persons all on the same merits.
If there is a case concerning a number of family members in the case all on the same merits, does Gonzi expect the court to decide the case of each family member individually as separate cases?
Gonzi is simply trying to waste the time of the Court and of the persons in whose name the case was filed.
Stewart Flint
Jul 15th 2009, 11:30
Talking about slowness in malta and everything MANANA in Spanish for to-morrow, but it seems that to-morrow never comes for the Maltese, smells a bit fishy as a guest who also paid through the nose for a car that has already been registered back home,and dragging their feet doesn't help one way or another, they have to come to some agreement as this will cost the tax payer alot more in the long run. This reminds me of a sign one sees in a Pub saying >>>FREE BEER TO-MORROW>>>> but to-morrow will always be the next day and the next day till dooms day if you get my drift. Stew.Flint. (Manchester united)