Woodline Ltd conceded that it owed Lm53,871 in VAT, Lm28,726 in additional tax and Lm5,322 in interest to the VAT Department.

The complainants said they had begun the process of paying off the money, but subsequently received a letter from the VAT Department to the effect that if they did not pay the above-mentioned sums in full, criminal proceedings would be instituted against them.

The complainants said the pressure exerted by the VAT Department resulted in them having to pay a lump sum of Lm87,920 in one go.

However, after paying the bill, the VAT Department issued a circular informing companies that they would benefit from a 90 per cent reduction in VAT returns if they had not yet settled their bills. This, said the complainants, was a clear breach of their fundamental human rights as protected by the European Convention for the Protection of Fundamental Human Rights.

The Convention states that no one should be discriminated against, said the complainants.

The discrimination, they said, was in the form of some people paying their bills and others who had not done so being allowed to get away with a 90 per cent reduction on their bill.

The complainants said that at no point did the VAT Department inform them that they would be issuing an amnesty for money owed. They therefore requested the courts to declare that the VAT Department had breached their fundamental human rights. They also requested the court to order that Woodline be included in the VAT amnesty scheme and to order the VAT Department to refund the amount of money already paid. Dr Jose Herrera, Dr Shazoo Ghaznavi and Dr Edward Zammit Lewis appeared for the complainants.