Netherlands – Crop Tax Advisers, January 2022, Court of Appeal, Case No. 200.192.332/01, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2022:343

« | »

The question at issue was whether a Crop tax adviser had acted in accordance with the requirements of a reasonably competent and reasonably acting adviser when advising on the so-called royalty routing and its implementation.

Judgement of the Court of Appeal

Crop is liable for the damages arising from the shortcoming. For the assessment of that damage, the case must be referred to the Statement of Damages, as the District Court has already decided. To answer the question of whether the likelihood of damage resulting from the shortcomings is plausible, a comparison must be made between the current situation and the situation in which business rates would have been applied. For the hypothetical situation, the rates to be recommended by the expert should be used. For the current situation, the Tax Authorities have agreed to adjusted pricing. The question whether and to what extent [the respondents] et al. can be blamed for insufficiently limiting their loss in the negotiations with the tax authority, as argued by Crop, should be adjudicated in the proceedings for the determination of damages, because it has not been made plausible beforehand that Crop’s obligation to pay compensation should lapse in full because this is required by the requirements of fairness under the given circumstances


Click here for English Translation


Click here for other translation



Related Guidelines

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *