BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[DonkeyRhubarb]

There are those who won't drop this whether MP stay and fight or not. What that means might only become clear in the future, but YOU ARE NOT ALONE.

Me for instance.

[centurian]

So what is the point of the 10am hearing if:-
a) Counsel on both sides already have the full judgement
b) Only the result will be announced at 10am and copies of the full judgement given to people that already have it anyway

How much money is being wasted on an utterly pointless ceremony. Just publish the full judgement in the afternoon...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

So what is the point of the 10am hearing if:-
a) Counsel on both sides already have the full judgement
b) Only the result will be announced at 10am and copies of the full judgement given to people that already have it anyway

How much money is being wasted on an utterly pointless ceremony. Just publish the full judgement in the afternoon...

Counsel are given a draft judgment in advance to point out any factual errors.

Although the judges often don't make any comment, the hearing does give them the opportunity. Two of the judges were due to be in court all day anyway, so the cost is probably minimal.

[paulsc]

Play up

There's a breathless hush in the Close to-night --
Ten to make and the match to win --
A bumping pitch and a blinding light,
An hour to play and the last man in.
And it's not for the sake of a ribboned coat,
Or the selfish hope of a season's fame,
But his Captain's hand on his shoulder smote --
'Play up! play up! and play the game!'

The sand of the desert is sodden red, --
Red with the wreck of a square that broke; --
The Gatling's jammed and the Colonel dead,
And the regiment blind with dust and smoke.
The river of death has brimmed his banks,
And England's far, and Honour a name,
But the voice of a schoolboy rallies the ranks:
'Play up! play up! and play the game!'

It is slightly more important than a game of cricket, it is not nearly as important as imminent death. Thank you for a thoughtful post and an apposite piece of poetry which, for me, helped put the announcement on Monday into a better perspective. Good luck to all on Monday.

[patbikeruk]

It is not more than important than cricket....

What do you mean it is more important than cricket........

Better to laugh than cry.....

It is slightly more important than a game of cricket, it is not nearly as important as imminent death. Thank you for a thoughtful post and an apposite piece of poetry which, for me, helped put the announcement on Monday into a better perspective. Good luck to all on Monday.

[OnYourBikeGB]

There's plenty of reason to be feeling anxious about Monday, but if we win, I'm going on holiday! . Somehow, just thinking about that makes it seem less stressful - maybe it just reminds me that we have a chance, defeat is most definitely not a foregone conclusion.

[StellaFan]

Me for instance.

[Leyther70]

If as the general theme suggests this will end up in the Supreme court. What is the point of the High Court and COA? Why not go straight to the Supreme court. We've already been sweating for 3 years, What is the point!!!!!!

I wish it was only 3 years, some of us have been under this burden for 10years now!

Perhaps its the 10 years that makes me just want this all over Monday, if we loose then thats 4 judges who have ruled against us, which makes me believe the SC route is probably futile.

Good Luck to All, lets hope we can raise a glass on Monday and smile for a change!

[Leyther70]

Years paid to MP

After my first year in the scheme HMRC did not make an enquiry into my return within the specified time limit, hence I paid MP their additional 4%. I am assume i'm not alone in this happening. However since then HMRC have included that year in their calculations.

I am wandering if we have any grounds to get this year struck out of the CN's or if MP will pay the 4% back to me given that the year was eventually challenged?

Is anyone else in this position and has anyone spoken to MP about this scenario?

To loose and have paid MP too is like being doubly punished!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I am wandering if we have any grounds to get this year struck out of the CN's or if MP will pay the 4% back to me given that the year was eventually challenged?

There are a fair few people in this situation.

You should find that MP have cited different grounds of appeal against this CN ie. HMRC were out of time.

If both the Huitson and Shiner cases are unsuccessful, then these CNs would be challenged at a tax tribunal.

In the unlikely event that you had to pay tax then you would be due a refund of the 4%.