Cakes, biscuits and law firms

What is the most critical issue on a hot Friday in July? Obviously, pinpointing the legal difference between a cake and a biscuit.

In case you missed it, a Scottish court has just ruled on the tantalising taste challenge of how eating a cake differs from eating a biscuit. You might recall that Marks & Spencer asked the same question of the judiciary south of the border in a case that rumbled on for 13 years, reaching the House of Lords and the European Court of Justice.

In the Scottish case the court was asked to rule in a challenge to HM Revenue & Customs over VAT charges. The snack in question? Marshmallow-based chocolate covered Snowballs. Yum.

Two Scottish judges gave their take on the matter after being asked to sample a plate of treats and decide, among other things, how to eat the snack. Eating a Snowball in the street would be ill advised, they concluded. Does that make it a cake or a biscuit? You’ll have to read our blog to find out.

All this talk of sweets is not only making our tummies rumble, it’s also taking us back to 2012 research into branding which compared chocolates with law firms. Key question: Is Berwin Leighton Paisner still Hotel Chocolat?

You decide.

Also on

Featured Briefings
Litigation: Mourant Ozannes: Ashes to ashes: limitations of ancillary relief in aid of foreign proceedings
Employment: Minter Ellison: Avoid the traps when reporting on employee share plans
Intellectual property: Walker Morris: The Lush v Amazon dispute, continued
Real estate: Winckworth Sherwood: Housing zones: can they fast-track housing schemes?
Company: Mourant Ozannes: Challenging antecedent transactions in Guernsey