8 Weird Questions That Courts Have Legally Answered

In the U.K., a value-added tax is added to certain snack foods, like crisps ("potato chips" in the U.S.). That's why Proctor & Gamble, makers of Pringles, argued that their product wasn't a crisp at all. They claimed that being made with less than 50% potato should exclude Pringles from the tax, suggesting they were less like crisps and more like biscuits ("cookies" in the U.S. - we really need to get on the same page with international snack nomenclature).

Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs disagreed with P&G, countering that making a potato crisp that's more filler than potato shouldn't preclude the company from paying the tax.

Proctor & Gamble won a 2008 High Court decision. This might seem like a matter too trivial for that venue, but when you consider that "what is a Pringle?" is the kind of question you'd only ask when stoned, the High Court was probably the most appropriate setting.

Nonetheless, the government appealed the decision, with the Court of Appeals ruling in their favor in 2009. P&G was forced to pay the tax - no word on whether they delivered the money in long, tubular cans.

Verdict: Pringles are delicious, taxable crisps.