.png)
.png)
Picking a way through the case of Daniel v HMRC
KEY POINTS
- Familiar facts but procedural complications.
- Interpretation of IR20 rules was a judicial review matter.
- Judicial review was the less costly option.
- HMRC had argued for the priority of judicial review in the previous case.
- Court of Appeal reaches a different conclusion from the Supreme Court.
The recent Court of Appeal decision in Daniel v HMRC [2012] EWCA Civ 1741 concerned a case management issue. It is no surprise that articles rarely appear in Taxation on this subject but this particular case may have a wider interest than usual.
Mr Daniel was claiming to be non-resident. He had left the UK to take up full-time employment abroad and during his period of non-residence he realised a capital gain.
Mr Daniel claimed that he was non-resident on...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
