BN66 - the road to Judicial Review

[smalldog]

Whilst not wishing to offend - By taking this personal slant it suggests that we are ignorant people because Bi-Polar disorder does not mean that youare man, in some cases it can be quite the oposite and intelligence can shine through quite blindinly. However, I'm sure this man has his reasons for doing what he is doing and moreover inciting such emotive raction. Understanding that we are all under a great deal of pressure a modicum of civility wouldn't go amis.
Aplogies for typo's...I'm in a terrible rush...

when the rest of my life is basically hanging by a thread it does tend to make me ever so slightly emotional...I make no apologies for it...

[weeboaby]

Thanks to everyone on this thread which I've been following with interest as someone likely to suffer greatly if this goes against us. It's helped me a lot to actually realise that I'm not alone in this.

And maybe, just maybe, there is hope my life won't be ruined after all.

[travellingknob]

Ok so supposing he rules in our favour, it goes to appeal and we win again. What is the end result ?
Would that mean BN66 has to be re-written or does it just not apply to us ? Would that be the end of it or is there another further appeal ? Or what happens if we win this round then loose the appeal ? Someone enlighten me please

[ROBIN REDBREAST]

How is the verdict delivered?

Does anyone know how the verdict is delivered and when we are likely to find out....?

Its difficult to gauge a realistic reaction from the feeds from the court as its clear that emotions run high amongst all of us who are affected.

It does sound positive however we all know how HMRC work and how they can use their "weight" to gain an unfair advantage.

It seems Elvin did us proud and Singh was really clutching at straws. Lets hope that the judge sees it in the same light.

I sense with appeals, whether us or HMRC, we will not get closure on this for some time and the cloud of homelessness and bankrupcy will continue to hang over our heads.

Thanks to all, I'm looking forward to some posts form DR...

[northernSoul]

There could be at least two more appeals in the UK before transfer to the Hague court. So it could go on for years.

i suspect best you can get is a declaration of incompatibilty with the ECHR. Then its up to the government to introduce new legisaltion and for parliament to pass it. If it wanted to. In the meantime, if it didn't pursue the case, the "debts" would be quietly forgotten.

Alternatively the government may go all the way to the European Court itself of course, which would likely take another two or three years. And as i think you don't get your costs back from there even if you win(mey be wrong here) Montpelier may just quit.

[SantaClaus]

Whilst not wishing to offend - By taking this personal slant it suggests that we are ignorant people because Bi-Polar disorder does not mean that youare man, in some cases it can be quite the oposite and intelligence can shine through quite blindinly. However, I'm sure this man has his reasons for doing what he is doing and moreover inciting such emotive raction. Understanding that we are all under a great deal of pressure a modicum of civility wouldn't go amis.
Aplogies for typo's...I'm in a terrible rush...

when the rest of my life is basically hanging by a thread it does tend to make me ever so slightly emotional...I make no apologies for it...

I too am highly aware of bi-polar, a close relative has it and I have had to deal with them being sectioned until they agreed treatment. But I agree, when someone acts so selfishly and maliciously and puts our families and homes at risk, anger and resentment is bound to be shown.

[Lazylobster]

A massive thanks to those who attended and have given news updates.

So now we wait.

chin up chaps ! tally ho, bandits at 12. . . . .

LL

[loftedtag]

Day 2

[QUOTE=SantaClaus;1051021]

As we all suspected, HMRC have been monitoring this blog and tried to substantiate their case from 4 or 5 posts on here. Elvin also countered this.

The judgement will be several weeks away and we are led to believe whichever side loses will appeal.

--------------------

Thanks Santa and others for all the info on day 2 very useful and informative. I have some comments/points if anyone could comment.

1/ From the very basic law I know, I thought you could not appeal unless further evidence or facts come up, however I expect that's the case in criminal law. What new arguements can be brought forward when this is the best HMRC can do after 8 years. The thought of this dragging on for years concerns me.

2/ If HMRC are monitoring this forum and they use 4 or 5 posts against us, what about the other 1995 people who are suffering mental anguish and the threat of bankruptcy, surprise lets ignore those. Maybe some clever people did think they spotted something, but the way I had it explained to me was, this has been going in since 2001 and HMRC had not persued anyone on the scheme. In fact I submitted my forms to HMRC in 2004 and they never wrote to me until 2007 telling me they thought the scheme did not work, this was the response to my 2004/5 return! Why not do in it 2004 I might have not spent it all or even dropped out of the scheme!

It looks to be going well for us and it makes me laugh to think the HMRC guys have been in court on their i-phones surfing this forum, here's wishing you Hectors a poor night sleep tonight, because if the best they can come up with is the government has a God given right to create the laws they want and back date them to whenever they see fit, then you have not got a hope. I see that as an insult to the Judge by saying whatever you rule the government is more important.

Thanks again to those people posting on this forum it keeps me sane and the other half off my back, we can see progress.

[Alan Jones]

Overview of the JR

Simple observations -

Elgin QC could have done better on the tax - particularly when he "fluffed" the reason why Milne QC thought scheme did not work.

If Huitson wins . In my humble opinion, HMRC will definitely appeal on grounds of insufficient disclosure or sic. If you want to understand this point . You need to read ( www.judgments.im ) the Judgment no. J983 of Montpelier v Jones and Morris in September 2009 in full and look for refs to
(a) Whether HMRC Handbook para 1660 brought the IR35 scheme into the public domain. You will note that Montpelier in this case argue the exact opposite to what was said by Elgin in the Huitson case. I say you can't have cake and eat it.
(b) Check what judge says about the Managing Partner who had the discretion to pay all the profits to one partner and nothing to the other pasrtners. This may put some doubt on whether the partnership was in fact a partnership. may fail the test put forward by Elgin QC RE Manek.
(c) Pre-ordained transaction per Ramsay - did not feature in the September 2009 judgement because montpelier dropped their argument that the contractors were entering into collateral contracts which gave HMRC a good reason to challenge under Ramsay/Furness. But they did not withdraw the evidence that contractors, having paid their £1000 were contractually bound to complete the structure. This smack of pre-ordained & Ramsay.
(d) Montpelier were fully aware that Milne QC thought the scheme did NOT work as early as january 2003. I recall Elgin QC said in summing up that Montpelier were not aware of Milne QC opinion.
(e) i suggest you undertake a poll of contractors to find out how many remember that the scheme was to be limited to 500 to keep below the HMRC (change the law ) radar. If HMRC win and i hope they do NOT (BUT based fairly on all the facts).Then i am NOT to blame.

Finally - just check out the Judgment in J370 Jones v Montpelier - this was before the highest court in the IOM who said that someone had "maybe - misled" the court. . This is why i lost my temper in Court because i have also been looking down a barrell for 9 years.

AND Really finally - who recalls the HMRC saying that the first scheme on their Radar was Montpelier and NOT Suo Motu. Dont worry about the aplogies because i am very thick skinned.

[helen7]

As we all suspected, HMRC have been monitoring this blog and tried to substantiate their case from 4 or 5 posts on here. Elvin also countered this

How can this forum be used in a court....HMRC could have set up an account and posted anything they wanted on her. Jones had at least 2 active posting account on the forum and was obviously looking for stuff to go against us. What would be to stop him planting what he thinks the court wants to hear.