• 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!

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 "OK - which of you is on the run from the Taxstappo?"

Collapse

  • DirtyDog
    replied
    He's in a canoe, peddling furiously to Panama.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    One of the comments



    What a mupp - As if they can do that in Germany
    They can, but it would be called something else.

    Then again, tax offices seem to be a law unto themselves everywhere in Europe. Retrospection, dealing in stolen goods, etc.

    Wikisourceofalltruth; Germany[edit]

    Germany has constitutional guarantees against improper detention and have been implemented in statutory law in a manner that can be considered as equivalent to writs of habeas corpus.

    Article 104, paragraph 1 of the German Constitution provides that deprivations of liberty may be imposed only on the basis of a specific enabling statute that also must include procedural rules. Article 104, paragraph 2 requires that any arrested individual be brought before a judge by the end of the day following the day of the arrest. For those detained as criminal suspects, article 104, paragraph 3 specifically requires that the judge must grant a hearing to the suspect in order to rule on the detention.

    Restrictions on the power of the authorities to arrest and detain individuals also emanate from article 2 paragraph 2 of the Constitution which guarantees liberty and requires a statutory authorization for any deprivation of liberty. In addition, several other articles of the Constitution have a bearing on the issue. The most important of these are article 19, which generally requires a statutory basis for any infringements of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution while also guaranteeing judicial review; article 20, paragraph 3, which guarantees the rule of law; and article 3 which guarantees equality.

    In particular, a constitutional obligation to grant remedies for improper detention is required by article 19, paragraph 4 of the Constitution which provides as follows: "Should any person’s right be violated by public authority, he may have recourse to the courts. If no other jurisdiction has been established, recourse shall be to the ordinary courts."

    Leave a comment:


  • cojak
    replied


    We even got a mention! I go for the Bermuda theory myself.

    (Going into Germany when he knows he's in dispute with the Finanzamt - muppet.)

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    One of the comments



    What a mupp - As if they can do that in Germany

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    One of the comments

    They should go to a lawyer immediately and issue a writ for Habeas Corpus. Simples.
    What a mupp - As if they can do that in Germany

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    started a topic OK - which of you is on the run from the Taxstappo?

    OK - which of you is on the run from the Taxstappo?

    Taxstappo - English Forum Switzerland

Working...
X