Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
IN DEFENCE OF SEMPRA
Alexander YS Georgiou*
Prudential Assurance v HMRC
Background
In Prudential Assurance Co v HMRC,1 their Lordships performed a stunning volte-face in the law of unjust enrichment, expressly departing from the decision in Sempra Metals Ltd v IRC,2 reached by the House of Lords only 11 years earlier. This note seeks critically to examine the reasoning underpinning that remarkable reversal.
The decision in Prudential is the latest blow in the litigation which has spawned from the “Franked Investment Income” taxation scheme. The basic facts, though somewhat technical, are by now a familiar sight. Pursuant to the Income and Corporation Taxes
* Brasenose College, Oxford. My sincere thanks to William Swadling, Jordan English and the anonymous referee for their insightful comments on earlier versions of this work. All errors which remain are my own.
1. [2018] UKSC 39; [2018] 3 WLR 652 (hereafter “Prudential”).
2. [2007] UKHL 34; [2008] 1 AC 561 (hereafter “Sempra”).
Case and comment
39