In a judgment dated 6 March 2025 (No. 51780C), the Higher Luxembourg Administrative Court addressed the issue of whether a tax claim filed by a third party was admissible without a written mandate existing at the time of filing.
The case involved a company that had submitted a claim on 16 March 2021 via a third-party service provider. A power of attorney was only produced later, dated 15 July 2021, but stated to be effective as of 16 December 2020, date of the contested tax assessments. The Director rejected the claim for lack of legal standing, arguing that the mandate must exist at the time of filing and cannot be backdated. The Administrative Court confirmed this reasoning.
The Administrative Court, however, adopted a less formalistic approach. While it reaffirmed that a special and express mandate must exist when the claim is filed, it held that the written confirmation of that mandate can be submitted later, if it clearly demonstrates that such authority was granted before the claim was lodged.
The Court criticised the administration's excessive formalism, stressing that procedural rules should not be applied in a way that prevents access to the claims process and, ultimately, to judicial review. Relying on constitutional principles such as access to justice and the right to an effective remedy, the Court found that a rigid interpretation of mandate requirements may disproportionately disadvantage the taxpayer.
Based on the substance of the written mandate, along with supporting circumstances (including prior communication and payment for services), the Court concluded that a valid mandate had indeed been given prior to the claim and declared the initial claim admissible.
Share on
