BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[smalldog]

the Government reserves the right to use retrospection, as in this instance, where it is fair, proportionate and in the public interest to do so.

so its in the public interest to bankrupt people and make their lives a misery is it? It must I presume also be in the public interest to retrospectively make MP's payback over zealous expense claims...

they are still missing the point, in every single piece of correspondence they make a huge assumption they are going to be able to claim back all this supposed tax? what planet are they living on....most of us dont have the funds they think we owe them...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

UPDATE - PwC oral hearing

Details confirmed as follows:

The oral hearing has been listed for 3 June before Stanley Burnton J in the High Court at 10:30. The Claimants' names are Ian Shiner and David Shienmann.

The PwC barrister expects to get a yes/no decision on the day. If it is a yes, then he reckons 9-12 months until the actual JR ie. Spring 2010.

We are hoping one of our group will be attending the hearing, and the news will be posted here as soon as we get it.

[robinhood]

Details confirmed as follows:

The oral hearing has been listed for 3 June before Stanley Burnton J in the High Court at 10:30. The Claimants' names are Ian Shiner and David Shienmann.

The PwC barrister expects to get a yes/no decision on the day. If it is a yes, then he reckons 9-12 months until the actual JR ie. Spring 2010.

We are hoping one of our group will be attending the hearing, and the news will be posted here as soon as we get it.

If the decision is NO, then not sure what hope we have of getting a positive outcome. 3rd June is going to be one hell of a day one way or the other !

[helen7]

I don't see how a review can be turned down. Surely we are entitied to a right to fair trial?

In fact, Montp even contest that with the changes that have been made to section 58, the tax planning still works.

[Emigre]

Details confirmed as follows:

The oral hearing has been listed for 3 June before Stanley Burnton J in the High Court at 10:30. The Claimants' names are Ian Shiner and David Shienmann.

The PwC barrister expects to get a yes/no decision on the day. If it is a yes, then he reckons 9-12 months until the actual JR ie. Spring 2010.

We are hoping one of our group will be attending the hearing, and the news will be posted here as soon as we get it.

Great work DR. Stanley Burnton is a Lord Justice, and is an Appeal Court judge and member of the Privy Council. The majority of Administrative Court listings don't seem to get the same senior judiciary as this hearing is going to get. Also, in his days as a judge he is not afraid of going head to head with the Govt. He criticised their handling of ID cards...

[ContractIn]

If the decision is NO, then not sure what hope we have of getting a positive outcome. 3rd June is going to be one hell of a day one way or the other !

Depends on the reason. Obviously hoping for a YES, but montp could prepare their case better if the latter.

[BrilloPad]

Great work DR. Stanley Burnton is a Lord Justice, and is an Appeal Court judge and member of the Privy Council. The majority of Administrative Court listings don't seem to get the same senior judiciary as this hearing is going to get. Also, in his days as a judge he is not afraid of going head to head with the Govt. He criticised their handling of ID cards...

That is very good news.....

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I am looking for your help again

http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...an-rights.html

Thanks
DR

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Petition

Has reached 700 signatures.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/RepealSection58

[nevergoingtopay]

Letter from MP

Got a letter from my MP today, Andrew MacKay.

His letter noted that there are a number of judicial reviews etc and this was the best way to proceed.

Attached was the standard treasury letter to him from Stephen Timms, it also thanked me from taking the trouble to raise my concerns about this with them! Nice!