BN66 - your opinions wanted

[Churchill]

Churchill asking someone for qualifications? How I laughed.

I thought you'd miss the point.

[Incognito]

Retrospection here *will* set a precedent because that is they way the British legal system works.

No it won't, this case is not the first example of retrospective tax laws.

Here is your precedent.

Maybe BolshieBastard can come along and give us his impartial opinions on the fairness of it all?

Careful, you'll get another nastygram (or 30).

[Incognito]

The legislation is being tested under European Law (ECHR - Huitson and EU Treaty - Shiner) because it is the only means of challenging primary legislation of Parliament.

I can't speak for others but I certainly would not attempt to compare our situation with victims of torture etc.

I'm not saying you don't have the right to argue your case as such, them is the laws of the land. Previous examples though on the Bn66 thread using the old "First they came for the ...." analogy do not help your case (in my opinion).

I do agree with you though that your best avenue of attack would be to try and point out the hypocrisy in that only yourselves have been targeted (currently). We pride ourselves on having a developed legal system based on the rule of law, one of the key tenets of that maxim is that no person is above the law. I think you have a strong argument that clearly there is one rule for some and another rule for others with regards to settlements, pursuit, etc. That's all theory though, quite how you would get a court to back your argument based on scholastic discussion is another issue.