Mandate

Vinge advises Wallenstam in successful case before Administrative Court of Appeal

January 14, 2013

Vinge has advised the real estate company Wallenstam in a successful case before the Administrative Court of Appeal. As a result of the judgment, Wallenstam is not required to pay tax on profits generated by sales of packaged real estate. The Gothenburg Administrative Court of Appeal issued its judgment on 8 January 2013 in a case which has attracted a great deal of attention and publicity within the real estate industry. The judgment entails that Wallenstam is not required to tax in the amount of approximately SEK 450 million.

The dispute was based on the “packaging” of blocks of flats performed by Wallenstam through the subsidiary, Guldmyran. The properties were placed into subsidiaries of Guldmyran, following which the shares in the subsidiaries were sold to tenant-owners associations which had been formed by the tenants. In conjunction with such sales, the total profit for the years, 2006, 2007 and 2008 amounted to SEK 1 668 million.

The Swedish Tax Agency (and subsequently the Administrative Court) took the view that due to the significant volume of sales, the shares in the subsidiaries should be classified as taxable inventory items. However, according to the Administrative Court of Appeal, the shares in question constituted assets held for business purposes and thus the profit on the shares was tax exempt.

At the inception of the dispute, Vinge applied for a precedent from the Supreme Administrative Court by submitting a request for an advance ruling on how the relevant tax rules should be construed. In the summer of 2012, the Supreme Administrative Court issued a favourable advance ruling which was referred to in the Administrative Court of Appeal’s reasons for its judgment. The ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court and the judgment of the Administrative Court of Appeal are of major significance for the real estate industry since up to now there has been a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the conditions under which sales of packaged real estate can take place.

Mart Tamm and David Kleist at Vinge in Gothenburg have advised Wallenstam throughout the course of the litigation.

Arbitration proceedings between a Member State and an investor from another Member State further curtailed – the judgment of the EU Court of Justice in PL Holdings

Following the much debated judgment by the CJEU in Achmea, arbitration clauses in bilateral investment treaties between Member States under which an investor in one of those Member States may bring proceedings against the other Member State are considered incompatible with EU law. However, the judgment in Achmea seemed to leave it open whether an arbitration agreement between a Member State and an investor from another Member State not based on such a clause would be considered acceptable by the CJEU. Yesterday’s ruling by the Court in the Swedish case PL Holdings (Case C-109/20) dealt with one aspect of this question, resulting in further limits to investment arbitration in the EU.
October 27, 2021

New statute prohibits unfair terms and conditions and practices in conjunction with the purchase of agricultural and food products

The so-called UTP Act prohibits buyers from using certain terms and conditions and practices against suppliers of agricultural and food products. The Swedish Competition Authority exercises supervision and can, among other things, carry out unannounced inspections and order individual to attend formal interviews. In conjunction with violations, sanctions such as injunctions subject to a default fine or a sanction fee of up to one per cent of the buyer’s annual turnover can be imposed. The UTP Act will enter into force on 1 November 2021 and will also be applicable to contracts which are entered into prior to this date.
October 05, 2021

Vinge employs additional antitrust economists to further strengthen its practice

We welcome Adam Löfquist and Carl Widstrand to our EU, Competition & Regulatory practice group.
September 30, 2021