Section 199(3) of the Finance Act 2012 removed VAT relief known as Low Value Consignment Relief ("LVCR") from low value goods sold to UK customers by mail order from the Channel Islands, with effect from 1 April 2012.
The appellant, Jersey Choice Limited ("JCL"), is a Jersey-registered company that grows horticultural products in Jersey and sells them to customers in the UK by mail order. It claims that the removal of the LVCR has caused it loss in excess of £15 million. JCL therefore issued proceedings against the respondent, His Majesty's Treasury, which is responsible for UK taxation policy. JCL seeks damages on the ground that section 199(3) was enacted in breach of EU law. It claims that section 199(3) unjustifiably treated Jersey and Guernsey differently from the other third territories within the common customs area, contrary to the free movement of goods provisions in articles 28, 30 and 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The High Court struck out JCL's claim on the basis that it had no prospect of success and was also an abuse of process. The Court of Appeal agreed that JCL's claim should be struck out on the basis that the pleadings disclosed no reasonable grounds (though it was not an abuse of process). JCL now appeals to the Supreme Court.

The Appellant was convicted of two offences and sentenced in May 2015 to a sentence of imprisonment referred to as a "determinate custodial sentence", by which the custodial and license periods of a prisoner's sentence are set at the outset. The Appellant was sentenced to two years, with a year to be spent in custody and a year on licence. Prisoners spend their licence periods in the community, subject to conditions, and are subject to recall.
In February 2016, the Appellant, having served the custodial element of the two offences, was released on licence. In September 2016, he was arrested on suspicion of involvement in offences, in breach of his licence conditions. He was ultimately recalled to prison by a decision of the Department of Justice on 21 October 2016. The Appellant's case was subsequently referred to the Parole Commissioner, which declined to release him, with the result that he remained in prison until 3 February 2017 when he was released.
The Appellant argues that the Department of Justice's decision to recall him to prison was made in breach of Article 5 (right to liberty and security) read with Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) ECHR, as incorporated by the HRA. It is argued that he has by virtue of the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2008 been discriminated against in comparison with the treatment afforded by that order to other allegedly comparable groups of prisoners, namely Indeterminate Custodial Sentence prisoners and Extended Custodial Sentence prisoners. The High Court in Northern Ireland dismissed his application for judicial review and the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland dismissed his appeal. He now appeals to the Supreme Court.