Skatteverket v PFC Clinic AB C-91/12, [2013] All ER (D) 192 (Apr)
Article 132(1)(b) and (c) of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 (the VAT Directive) should be interpreted as meaning that: supplies of services such as those at issue in the main proceedings, consisting of plastic surgery and other cosmetic treatments, fell within the concepts of “medical care” and “the provision of medical care” within the meaning of Art 132(1)(b) and (c) where those services were intended to diagnose, treat or cure diseases or health disorders or to protect, maintain or restore human health. The subjective understanding that the person who underwent plastic surgery or a cosmetic treatment had of it was not in itself decisive in order to determine whether that intervention had a therapeutic purpose. The fact that services such as those at issue in the main proceedings were supplied or undertaken by a licensed member of the medical profession or that the purpose of such services was determined by such a professional might influence the assessment of whether interventions such as those at issue in the main proceedings fell within the concept of “medical care” or
