British financier Sanjay Shah is fighting Denmark over a £1.5 billion alleged tax fraud. Antonie Robertson / The National
British financier Sanjay Shah is fighting Denmark over a £1.5 billion alleged tax fraud. Antonie Robertson / The National
British financier Sanjay Shah is fighting Denmark over a £1.5 billion alleged tax fraud. Antonie Robertson / The National
British financier Sanjay Shah is fighting Denmark over a £1.5 billion alleged tax fraud. Antonie Robertson / The National

Dubai millionaire Sanjay Shah returns to UK court in fight to pay legal fees


Nicky Harley
  • English
  • Arabic

The millionaire Dubai resident Sanjay Shah, who is accused of a £1.5 billion (Dh6.8bn) Danish tax fraud, has returned to the UK’s High Court in an attempt to gain access to millions more in loan payments to cover his legal costs.

Mr Shah, who is British but lives in Dubai, has seen his funds cut off as he fights a court case against the Danish tax authority, SKAT, which claims he was the key mover behind a £1.5bn tax fraud.

Earlier this year the Danish authorities placed a worldwide freezing order on many of his assets, including a £15m home near London’s Hyde Park, as it seeks to recoup its losses from the scam.

Mr Shah has returned to London’s High Court in a bid to gain access to £13.6m in loan repayments, which his legal team claims is not part of the seizure order, to use to fund his legal battle.

He had sought to ask the people repaying the loan, who are also subjected to the same investigation by SKAT, to pay the money to him.

However, the court heard the other defendants feared that they could face “double jeopardy” if SKAT seized the funds and could leave them liable to paying the sums back twice.

“In broad terms the Sanjay Shah application is intended to ensure that the Sanjay Shah defendants obtain the loan proceeds and can use them to meet their legal expenses, and the Stakeholder application is intended to ensure that the Stakeholder defendants are not at risk in repaying the loans, and later finding themselves faced with a claim that they paid the wrong person or otherwise remain liable for the amount of the loan proceeds,” Mr Justice Foxton said.

The court has ruled the money should be paid directly to the court and has ordered SKAT and Mr Shah’s legal teams to try to come to an arrangement over the funds before a further hearing to be held in July to decide who gets the money.

Mr Justice Foxton said he hoped the July hearing would not be affected by funding issues if there was a problem over the payment of legal fees.

“I would ask the parties to explore whether agreement can be reached for some element of the loan proceeds to be released to the Sanjay Shah defendants within a short period, to avoid that undesirable position,” he added.

Mr Shah’s legal team had tried to argue that it was “too late” for SKAT to seek an injunction on the loan money as it has had “ample opportunity” to do so.

“I do not accept that this argument provides a simple answer to the issue before the court,” Mr Justice Foxton added.

“If SKAT's proprietary claim to the loan proceeds is eventually upheld, then the use of that money by the Sanjay Shah defendants to meet their legal expenses will have involved a civil wrong.”

The Danish tax authority has launched the legal action in the UK as many of the companies allegedly involved were based there.

SKAT claims that Mr Shah was a central player in a scheme in which foreign companies pretended to own shares in Danish companies and then claim tax refunds they were not eligible to receive.

Mr Shah claims that he was exploiting a perfectly legal loophole to make trades that are at the heart of the alleged wrongdoing.

He said his schemes were a “widely known and wholly legitimate trading strategy” but have been stopped by other European governments.

Earlier this year a centre for autistic children in the UAE funded by Mr Shah was closed because of the global asset freeze on his multi-million-pound fortune.

His company Solo Capital Partners, which closed in 2016, was the main funder of the Autism Rocks Support Centre, charity financial records show.

Mr Shah’s wife, Usha – described as founder and chief executive of the centre – is one of the 92 defendants accused of involvement in the tax fraud, according to documents filed in the High Court.

She is said to have been the sole director of a company that saw tens of millions of pounds pass through its accounts from the tax operation.

The UK-based Autism Rocks charity was set up in 2014 and sought to raise money by organising concerts that featured artists including Prince, Joss Stone and Elvis Costello.

The support centre was launched three years later in Dubai and was described as a “boutique centre offering evidence-based therapies that work”.

Mr Shah moved to Dubai in 2009.

Ten tax points to be aware of in 2026

1. Domestic VAT refund amendments: request your refund within five years

If a business does not apply for the refund on time, they lose their credit.

2. E-invoicing in the UAE

Businesses should continue preparing for the implementation of e-invoicing in the UAE, with 2026 a preparation and transition period ahead of phased mandatory adoption. 

3. More tax audits

Tax authorities are increasingly using data already available across multiple filings to identify audit risks. 

4. More beneficial VAT and excise tax penalty regime

Tax disputes are expected to become more frequent and more structured, with clearer administrative objection and appeal processes. The UAE has adopted a new penalty regime for VAT and excise disputes, which now mirrors the penalty regime for corporate tax.

5. Greater emphasis on statutory audit

There is a greater need for the accuracy of financial statements. The International Financial Reporting Standards standards need to be strictly adhered to and, as a result, the quality of the audits will need to increase.

6. Further transfer pricing enforcement

Transfer pricing enforcement, which refers to the practice of establishing prices for internal transactions between related entities, is expected to broaden in scope. The UAE will shortly open the possibility to negotiate advance pricing agreements, or essentially rulings for transfer pricing purposes. 

7. Limited time periods for audits

Recent amendments also introduce a default five-year limitation period for tax audits and assessments, subject to specific statutory exceptions. While the standard audit and assessment period is five years, this may be extended to up to 15 years in cases involving fraud or tax evasion. 

8. Pillar 2 implementation 

Many multinational groups will begin to feel the practical effect of the Domestic Minimum Top-Up Tax (DMTT), the UAE's implementation of the OECD’s global minimum tax under Pillar 2. While the rules apply for financial years starting on or after January 1, 2025, it is 2026 that marks the transition to an operational phase.

9. Reduced compliance obligations for imported goods and services

Businesses that apply the reverse-charge mechanism for VAT purposes in the UAE may benefit from reduced compliance obligations. 

10. Substance and CbC reporting focus

Tax authorities are expected to continue strengthening the enforcement of economic substance and Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting frameworks. In the UAE, these regimes are increasingly being used as risk-assessment tools, providing tax authorities with a comprehensive view of multinational groups’ global footprints and enabling them to assess whether profits are aligned with real economic activity. 

Contributed by Thomas Vanhee and Hend Rashwan, Aurifer

Dr Amal Khalid Alias revealed a recent case of a woman with daughters, who specifically wanted a boy.

A semen analysis of the father showed abnormal sperm so the couple required IVF.

Out of 21 eggs collected, six were unused leaving 15 suitable for IVF.

A specific procedure was used, called intracytoplasmic sperm injection where a single sperm cell is inserted into the egg.

On day three of the process, 14 embryos were biopsied for gender selection.

The next day, a pre-implantation genetic report revealed four normal male embryos, three female and seven abnormal samples.

Day five of the treatment saw two male embryos transferred to the patient.

The woman recorded a positive pregnancy test two weeks later.