.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.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
