BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[Morlock]

Some dude at the HMRC Debt Management and Banking department in Stoke called Mr Bartholemew has sent me a nasty threatening letter saying we still owe £46k, despite the Montp appeal having gone in on time. They are threating to "take us to court and sell our possessions at auction".

It also says "if you do not send us your returns now, we will have to estimate the amount that you owe. Any estimate of the tax you owe will become a legally enforceable debt."

What "returns" are they asking for?

[Emigre]

Did anybody notice this story in the news?

BBC News - Supreme Court independence 'threatened' by funding

It doesn't seem to have had much coverage but it has me concerned...

There's an interesting quote in there though...

Ken Clarke added: "If he gives judgements against the government we obey them...". So that's clear then. If/when the Supreme Court rules in our favour this Govt will obey the findings of the Court.

Dear Ken, filed for later reminder.

[paulsc]

Play for Time

In this blog in the Telegraph Neil O'Brien, the Director of Policy Exchange, states that

"The fact that citizens from each of the 47 member countries have a direct right of appeal to the Court [The European Court of Human Rights] means that it is heavily overloaded with cases and that judgements are delayed. It has a backlog of over 120,000 cases, which will take until after 2050 to work through."

I will be 93 by then if I get there. I don't think I will care much about HMRC. Mind you the interest will have accumulated.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

In this blog in the Telegraph Neil O'Brien, the Director of Policy Exchange, states that

"The fact that citizens from each of the 47 member countries have a direct right of appeal to the Court [The European Court of Human Rights] means that it is heavily overloaded with cases and that judgements are delayed. It has a backlog of over 120,000 cases, which will take until after 2050 to work through."

I will be 93 by then if I get there. I don't think I will care much about HMRC. Mind you the interest will have accumulated.

Unfortunately there would be the "small" matter of persuading HMRC to hold off enforcement while we take it to Europe.

I think that might prove very difficult if we lost in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

[SantaClaus]

Unfortunately there would be the "small" matter of persuading HMRC to hold off enforcement while we take it to Europe.

I think that might prove very difficult if we lost in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

That might be when this group needs to join forces and take a joint legal action against HMRC.

[TheBarCapBoyz]

What "returns" are they asking for?

No idea. Received the same letter from the Bloke in Stoke again today.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

That might be when this group needs to join forces and take a joint legal action against HMRC.

Or saddle up the donkey and dust off that old cricket bat.

Seriously though, if we lost in the UK Supreme Court I think the chances of success in Europe would be very slim.

Watching the two recent TV programmes on the Supreme Court, it's clear from interviews that most barristers now regard this court as the end of the road, and I think we will see fewer and fewer cases in future ending up in Strasbourg.

PS.

HMRC's barrister Rabinder Singh was in the programme on More4 last night. He was one of the barristers involved in the case against the Government over the freezing of assets of suspected terrorists.

http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/Members/1...r%20Singh.aspx

[BolshieBastard]

Seriously though, if we lost in the UK Supreme Court I think the chances of success in Europe would be very slim.

Is this the first step in softening us up to the fact MP will not follow the case to Europe then?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Is this the first step in softening us up to the fact MP will not follow the case to Europe then?

Absolutely not. They haven't said anything to me about it.

I'm just expressing a personal opinion that I no longer feel our prospects would be any better in Europe than the UK Supreme Court.

In fact, as this article infers, the European Court of Human Rights may be more conservative, and less willing to interfere, than the domestic court.

The Effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on Taxation Policy and Administration - [2004] eJTR 8; (2004) 2 eJournal of Tax Research 155

[Buzby]

Supreme Court

Or saddle up the donkey and dust off that old cricket bat.

Seriously though, if we lost in the UK Supreme Court I think the chances of success in Europe would be very slim.

Watching the two recent TV programmes on the Supreme Court, it's clear from interviews that most barristers now regard this court as the end of the road, and I think we will see fewer and fewer cases in future ending up in Strasbourg.

just watched the E4 program, and what I found most interesting was the summary at the end by Lord Phillips. Cannot quote verbatim, but he tries to explain what is rule of law and what is fair. Rule of law is that, we might not like it but its the law. I hope we get our case in front of him so that he can concur that at the time we used DTT it was the rule of law. fairness doesn't come into it. "Aggressive avoidance" - what's that. it was the rules of law.

final point, I agree with DR that cannot see this now going to Europe, so I am preparing myself for this being over with 1 year. If Lord Phillips and his merry men (and woman) do not see the rule of law like I do, then I probably should put myself on the council house waiting list now!