• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Dragonfly Consulting Appeal"

Collapse

  • THEPUMA
    replied
    Originally posted by DaveB View Post
    Hout99 also has a write up here

    Over all it looks favorable ( IMO ) for the contractor but judgement is not expected untill mid-summer.
    Sorry I didn't do a write up as others had summarised far more articulately than I would have been able.

    If the appeal is successful, I'll eat my hat! Funnily enough, my 17 month old son found it highly amusing to smother his hair with strawberries, grapes and pizza topping whilst repeating the word "hat" yesterday.

    The only remote possibility would be that it may be referred back to the SC because insufficient consideration was given to the intention of the parties, but that would only be a stay of execution and personally I wouldn't waste everyone's time as this is a marginal factor at best and the original decision wasn't marginal.

    Leave a comment:


  • DaveB
    replied
    Hout99 also has a write up here

    Over all it looks favorable ( IMO ) for the contractor but judgement is not expected untill mid-summer.

    Leave a comment:


  • max
    replied
    Originally posted by MickeyP View Post
    any news on this?
    The PCG site had an excellent write up on the days proceeding...check that.

    You are are member right?

    Leave a comment:


  • MickeyP
    replied
    any news on this?

    Leave a comment:


  • Moscow Mule
    replied
    Originally posted by THEPUMA View Post
    Yep I can do that.
    Ta.

    Leave a comment:


  • dmini
    replied
    I'm interested - cos I worked for the same end client that HMRC are saying was within IR35 at the same time as Jon. It's a bit too close for comfort!

    Leave a comment:


  • THEPUMA
    replied
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    You could just post here in the evening (if you don't mind).

    I'd like to know what the atmosphere is like, rather than just the dry reporting of the decision that you get from the court.
    Yep I can do that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Moscow Mule
    replied
    Originally posted by THEPUMA View Post
    I don't have a blog.
    You could just post here in the evening (if you don't mind).

    I'd like to know what the atmosphere is like, rather than just the dry reporting of the decision that you get from the court.

    Leave a comment:


  • gadgetman
    replied
    Or you can do what Wilmslow does and just post the whole of your life on here.

    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Well you can start one.

    Post about your "interesting" life, spambots will leave comments and random mad Americans will read it and link to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • THEPUMA
    replied
    Originally posted by Lewis View Post
    Ah right. Are the PCG defending?
    Accountax are defending. I suspect PCG are supporting financially.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lewis
    replied
    Originally posted by THEPUMA View Post
    It's the IR35 case lost last December (from memory). One of two found to be caught by IR35 by Charles Hellier, who is perceived to be a bit of a maverick and held that the right of substitution in the contract was fettered and therefore insufficient to keep the contract outside IR35 whereas it is generally believed that other Commissioners may have held it to be unfettered.

    All IMHO.
    Ah right. Are the PCG defending?

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by THEPUMA View Post
    I don't have a blog.
    Well you can start one.

    Post about your "interesting" life, spambots will leave comments and random mad Americans will read it and link to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • THEPUMA
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Live blogging is basically taking notes, photos, or recordings at lectures, conferences, and presentations of what was said and posting it to your blog.
    I don't have a blog.

    Leave a comment:


  • THEPUMA
    replied
    Originally posted by Lewis View Post
    Excuse the ignorance but what is this case about?
    It's the IR35 case lost last December (from memory). One of two found to be caught by IR35 by Charles Hellier, who is perceived to be a bit of a maverick and held that the right of substitution in the contract was fettered and therefore insufficient to keep the contract outside IR35 whereas it is generally believed that other Commissioners may have held it to be unfettered.

    All IMHO.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lewis
    replied
    Originally posted by THEPUMA View Post
    Will take place next week either on the 4th, 5th or 6th (TBC on the 3rd) at the Royal Courts of Justice on the Strand.

    It's open to the public.

    Because I'm really sad, I'm intrigued by this case and will be going along to watch. If anyone else is going to go, please let me know if you want to meet up for a drink at lunchtime.
    Excuse the ignorance but what is this case about?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X