APN JR defeated

[Iliketax]

I managed to get hold of an earlier draft of the decision which had the following arguments that did not make the final decision:

GROUND 6 - PROPORTIONALITY

155A. Mr Southern QC's very junior counsel argued that each of the claimants' direct male linear ancestors was more substantial than those of the defendant. Counsel relied on the skeleton argument made on the back of the photocopy of Article 6. Mr Eadie for the defendant suggested that this was complete and utter nonsense. I agree with Mr Eadie. To quote Lord Denning MR in A Smith v Jones [1995 BMW 330i] "as many taxpayers have uttered for time immemorial, it is well know that [the defendant] is a complete and utter B....". As result of the defendant's unknown parentage, it cannot be said that the mass of the claimants' male parents are proportionately more massive than those of the defendant.

[DotasScandal]

I managed to get hold of an earlier draft of the decision which had the following arguments that did not make the final decision:

[StrengthInNumbers]

by the end of 2016 bringing forward £5.5bn in payments for the Exchequer by March 2020

Propaganda and nothing else. HMRC u r not bringing anything forward. U will have to return this money if u lose. U r doing creative accounts and spinning the PR Wheel.

[nickersan]

by the end of 2016 bringing forward £5.5bn in payments for the Exchequer by March 2020

Propaganda and nothing else. HMRC u r not bringing anything forward. U will have to return this money if u lose. U r doing creative accounts and spinning the PR Wheel.

The massive miscalculation being the assumption that folks have the £££s to pay...

[DotasScandal]

Article on The Telegraph

Article on The Telegraph

Please contribute to the comments (or at least upvote mine ).

Looks like readers of the T don't all cheer for "Justice" Simler's judgement

[centurian]

Article on The Telegraph

Please contribute to the comments (or at least upvote mine ).

Looks like readers of the T don't all cheer for "Justice" Simler's judgement

Yes, I saw that yesterday evening - first time I have seen a journo from a major rag take a view so heavily against HMRC - so much so, that it probably went beyond what many would consider a "balanced" article - she gave HMRC no quarter at all.

Not that there have been any shortage of biased articles taking HMRCs side - but this is the first one I have seen drop down on the other side of the fence.

[meanttobeworking]

Another anti-HMRC article from The Telegraph, and another shining example of HMRC's morality, or lack thereof...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/r...-in-error.html

[DotasScandal]

Another anti-HMRC article from The Telegraph, and another shining example of HMRC's morality, or lack thereof...

Bomber Command Memorial fundraiser faces loss of home after taxman keeps £40,000 he paid in error - Telegraph

Surreal.

[DotasScandal]

Surreal.

Sorta confirms my views that once money's in, it'll never come back.

[Underbase]

Sorta confirms my views that once money's in, it'll never come back.

Seems the hard and fast 4 year rule in effect here, pity they are flaunting it the other way around.