Continue reading "Tax: The limitations of Ramsay"
This post is only available to members.
Tax: The limitations of Ramsay
When will an NNDR tax avoidance scheme be subject to a successful challenge? Nicholas Trompeter examines a case that sheds light on the points considered ‘The local authorities in Rossendale submitted that the notion of an “owner” of an unoccupied property had to be interpreted purposively as an owner with a real entitlement to possession.’ …
Cases Referenced
Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.
- Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson [2004] UKHL 51
- Berry v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2011] UKUT 81 (TCC)
- Brown v City of London Corporation [1996] 1 WLR 1070
- Collector of Stamp Revenue v Arrowtown Assets Ltd [2003] HKCFA 52
- MacNiven (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Westmoreland Investments Ltd [2001] UKHL 6
- Rossendale Borough Council v Hurstwood Properties (A) Ltd & ors [2017] EWHC 3461 (Ch)
- Rossendale Borough Council v Hurstwood Properties (A) Ltd & ors [2019] EWCA Civ 364
- Snook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd [1967] 2 QB 786
- Trigg v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2018] EWCA Civ 17
- UBS AG & anor v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2016] UKSC 13
- Westbrook Dolphin Square Ltd v Friends Life Ltd (No.2) [2014] EWHC 2433 (Ch)
- WT Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1981] UKHL 1