BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Emigre]

Who makes that call ?

MP have committed to taking Huitson to the ECHR. The grounds are the same/similar as those in the Steed application. There is a huge backlog at the ECHR (Steed applied nearly 3 years ago and hasn't got to the top of the intray yet) so it makes sense for cases to be joined where possible. I recall MP stating that they are discussing direction with other parties.

Ultimately, it is at the discretion of ECHR to join the cases.

[winstontizzer]

I would also expect that the ECHR will not only pay high regard to its previous decisions on Human Rights and the upholding of the Rule of Law by all Member States but also must be guided by the findings of its own appointed Committees of leading academics and jurists that have spent a significant amount of time reporting on the cornerstones of EU Law and in particular on the outcome of a very significant report prepared just last year being the EU Study on The Rule of Law, adopted/ratified/accepted by the Venice Commission in April 2011. The ECHR cannot ignore this. This is an extract on retrospection in the context of the duty of all Member States to uphold the pillars of the Rule of Law (the one in question here is Legal Certainty) and the Convention on Human Rights.
46. Legal certainty requires that legal rules are clear and precise, and aim at ensuring that situations and legal relationships remain foreseeable. Retroactivity also goes against the principle of legal certainty, at least in criminal law (Article 7 ECHR), since legal subjects have to know the consequences of their behaviour; but also in civil and administrative law to the extent it negatively affects rights and legal interests.
I fully take the point that Article 7 makes is clear that one cannot be subject to a prosecution under a criminal law having been passed with retrospective effect but this EU Body says that the same principle of Article 7 should also apply to civil claims where the individual suffers a penalty under a civil law having retrospective effect because his rights and interest in property are abused. I would expect the Steed lawyers to know about this EU Study/Report but does anyone have a feed through to them to alert them to it?

That's the one. We would have been home and dry by now if we could have claimed Article 7. It is because we couldn't that we were in Court on A1 P1 which allows Governments a margin of appreciation on tax.

The cases that Buzby has brought up had some airtime at the HC and CoA. However, the Courts appear to have disregarded legal precedent and enforced some sort of unwritten social policy. All the Courts did was to enforce Parliament's supremacy. The Courts did not consider the legality of the scheme before or after S58, both of which are still potentially available.

ECHR is more bound by the cases listed by Buzby than are the UK Courts who are not in fact bound by them at all (they look like muppets in ECHR if they disregard them). I understand that the application by Steed is extremely thorough and lists such cases in its submission. I guess we are hoping that Huitson and or Shiner may be allowed to join that case and so strengthen it.

[ready_to_leave]

I would also expect that the ECHR will not only pay high regard to its previous decisions on Human Rights and the upholding of the Rule of Law by all Member States but also must be guided by the findings of its own appointed Committees of leading academics and jurists that have spent a significant amount of time reporting on the cornerstones of EU Law and in particular on the outcome of a very significant report prepared just last year being the EU Study on The Rule of Law, adopted/ratified/accepted by the Venice Commission in April 2011. The ECHR cannot ignore this. This is an extract on retrospection in the context of the duty of all Member States to uphold the pillars of the Rule of Law (the one in question here is Legal Certainty) and the Convention on Human Rights.
46. Legal certainty requires that legal rules are clear and precise, and aim at ensuring that situations and legal relationships remain foreseeable. Retroactivity also goes against the principle of legal certainty, at least in criminal law (Article 7 ECHR), since legal subjects have to know the consequences of their behaviour; but also in civil and administrative law to the extent it negatively affects rights and legal interests.
I fully take the point that Article 7 makes is clear that one cannot be subject to a prosecution under a criminal law having been passed with retrospective effect but this EU Body says that the same principle of Article 7 should also apply to civil claims where the individual suffers a penalty under a civil law having retrospective effect because his rights and interest in property are abused. I would expect the Steed lawyers to know about this EU Study/Report but does anyone have a feed through to them to alert them to it?

So if you refused to pay - would you then be guilty of a criminal offence imposed retrospectively? which obviously is expressly forbidden by European Law? hmm...

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

So if you refused to pay - would you then be guilty of a criminal offence imposed retrospectively? which obviously is expressly forbidden by European Law? hmm...

Why not go the whole hog? As things stand your SAR was making a claim that was now against the law and was done so knowingly. So you were now engaged in tax evasion which is criminal so not only does what you say apply but you should have been now offered the evasion amnesty that HMRC had.

Now you see how retrospection is not just wrong, it cannot apply except in the corridors of power.

[Hot Pasty]

My MP is contacting the chancellor

Why not go the whole hog? As things stand your SAR was making a claim that was now against the law and was done so knowingly. So you were now engaged in tax evasion which is criminal so not only does what you say apply but you should have been now offered the evasion amnesty that HMRC had.

Now you see how retrospection is not just wrong, it cannot apply except in the corridors of power.

Just had an email to say that my MP is writing to the chancellor regarding retrospective taxation.

[AlbionRovers]

Just had an email to say that my MP is writing to the chancellor regarding retrospective taxation.

==

Ditto, but I've been waiting for a reply since before the Budget (and I've also since chased it up via my MP). Is the chancellor generally busy round about Budget time? Anyone know?

[portseven]

==

Ditto, but I've been waiting for a reply since before the Budget (and I've also since chased it up via my MP). Is the chancellor generally busy round about Budget time? Anyone know?

he is busy trying to convince the goverment to repeal retrospective taxation laws .....

the indian goverment...

[Jannos3791]

Current state of play question?

Hi all,

I have received a letter from HMRC (as I am sure a lot of you have) and am interested to know what people are thinking of doing next please? Does anyone know if Montpelier has been included in 'bundle' being brought forward to the HMRC please? My years under the scheme where 05/06 and 06/07.

Many thanks in advance for your time.

[TalkingCheese]

Hi all,

I have received a letter from HMRC (as I am sure a lot of you have) and am interested to know what people are thinking of doing next please? Would someone be able to define the case for the European High Court in plain English for me please? Many thanks in advance for your time.

When I get something I will be forwarding it to Montpelier. Did you get it this morning ?

The path to ECHR is unknown yet I believe. We are waiting for advice.

[Jannos3791]

When I get something I will be forwarding it to Montpelier. Did you get it this morning ?

The path to ECHR is unknown yet I believe. We are waiting for advice.

I got it in mid-March, it was a letter from the special investigations team. I didn't forward it to Montpelier as assumed more would get it and do the deed for me.

Do you have a timeline as to when we'll be receiving said advice? I tried contacting Dawn Bull yesterday and left a message (not sure of Dawn is a pseudo for a mailbox?).