Thief acquired no title and could not sell A purchaser used a stolen driving licence to obtain credit for and purchase a car. He then purported to sell it to the respondent, and then disappeared. The finance company sought return of the car. Held: (Lords Nicholls and Millett dissenting) The rogue had not acquired a … Continue reading Shogun Finance Limited v Hudson: HL 19 Nov 2003
HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Bonus issue o f redeemable preference shares followed by redemption – Main object to avoid loss of fam ily control through sales to meet estate duty – Whether a commercial object – Married woman not separately assessed – Whether redemption moneys subject to counteraction – Finance A … Continue reading Inland Revenue Commissioners v Goodwin: HL 28 Jan 1976
Niru contracted to buy lead from Milestone, to be paid for in a letter of credit, against certifying documents produced for the purpose. Mr Mahdavi, the individual behind Milestone, procured CAI to finance the acquisition of warrants to be retained by them as security for repayment of their loan by, ultimately, the purchase price payable … Continue reading Niru Battery Manufacturing Company, Bank Sepah Iran v Milestone Trading Limited: CA 28 Apr 2004
Two ladies had a car for sale. A buyer came along. He fooled them into believing him to be someone else, and they sold him the car, after checking the name in the telephone directory. Before the cheque bounced, the rogue sold the car to the defendant from whom the ladies now sought the return … Continue reading Ingram v Little: 27 Jul 1960
(New Zealand) ‘a void contract is a paradox; in truth there is no contract at all.’ and ‘the difficulty in deciding whether a mistake of identity prevents the formation of a concluded contract is a proper assessment of the facts rather than the ascertainment of the law’. Judges: Gresson P Citations: [1960] NZLR 406 Cited … Continue reading Fawcett v Star Car Sales Limited: 1960
A rogue had purchased a car, using a false name to obtain finance. He had then sold it to the defendant. The finance company claimed the car back. Held: The dealer had not taken all the steps he might have done to check the identity of the buyer, but Cundy v Lindsay was binding, and … Continue reading Norman Hudson v Shogun Finance Ltd: CA 28 Jun 2001
A testator did have the control of a company within section 55(1) of the 1940 Act, by virtue of the fact that he held shares as an individual in his own right and also was entitled to vote as a trustee for a further allocation of shares (making together more than half the total of … Continue reading Barclays Bank Limited v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 1960
References: [1961] 1 QB 31, [1960] EWCA Civ 1 Links: Bailii Coram: Pearce LJ and Devlin LJ Two ladies had a car for sale. A buyer came along. He fooled them into believing him to be someone else, and they sold him the car, after checking the name in the telephone directory. Before the cheque … Continue reading Ingram v Little; 27 Jul 1960
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Capitalisation of profits by company followed by reduction and repayment of capital – Funds required to finance offer in opposition to takeover bid – Whether bona fide commercial transactions – Whether tax advantage a main object – Finance Act 1960 (8 and 9 Eliz. 2, c. 44), … Continue reading Inland Revenue Commissioners v Brebner: HL 23 Feb 1967
HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Contracts made before 5th April 1960 for forward dividend-strip – Purchase money released to vendor after that date as and when dividends paid – Whether tax advantage obtained from transactions in securities carried out before 5th April 1960 – Finance Act 1960 (8 and 9 C Eliz. … Continue reading Greenberg v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 20 Jul 1971
HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Transaction in securities – Company recon- struction – Surplus assets o f old company distributed in voluntary liquidation – Agreement for liquidation providing for agreed methods o f valuation and distribution – Whether (a) whole scheme o f reconstruction, (b) liquidation agreement, (c) distribution in liquidation a transaction in … Continue reading Inland Revenue Commissioners v Joiner: HL 26 Nov 1975
The defendant had charged his property to the Halifax. Abbey supplied funds to secure its discharge, but its own charge was not registered. It sought to take advantage of the Halifax’s charge which had still not been removed. Held: A mortgagee whose loan is used to repay another charged debt is subrogated to that debt, … Continue reading Boscawen and Others v Bajwa and Others; Abbey National Plc v Boscawen and Others: CA 10 Apr 1995
The Court was asked whether an employee’s remuneration is taxable as his or her emoluments or earnings when it is paid to a third party in circumstances in which the employee had no prior entitlement to receive it himself or herself. Held: The company’s appeal failed. The purposive approach to the interpretation of the general … Continue reading RFC 2012 Plc (Formerly The Rangers Football Club Plc) v Advocate General for Scotland: SC 5 Jul 2017
UBS AG devised an employee bonus scheme to take advantage of the provisions of Chapter 2 of the 2003 Act, with the sole purpose other than tax avoidance, and such consequential advantages as would flow from tax avoidance. Several pre-ordained steps were taken according to a detailed timetable. Once the structure of the scheme had … Continue reading UBS Ag and Another v Revenue and Customs: SC 9 Mar 2016
Private Hearings are Not in Secret H sought an order restricting reporting of the divorce financial remedy proceedings, or an anonymity order. Held: The application was refused save as to identification of the children, and certain tax matters. The hearing was listed as in Private restricted only that certain people only were entitled to attend, … Continue reading Gallagher v Gallagher (No 1) (Reporting Restrictions): FC 13 Jun 2022
HL Surtax – Procedure – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Reference to Tribunal on whether prima facie case for prcx:eeding – Taxpayer not entitled to be heard by Tribunal or to see certificate and counter-statement of Commissioners of Inland Revenue before decision reached – Finance A ct 1960 C (8 and 9 Eliz. 2 c. … Continue reading Wiseman v Borneman: HL 29 Jul 1969
A jeweller had a ring for sale. The buyer pretended to be somebody else: ‘I am Sir George Bullough of 11 St. James’s Square.’ The jeweller had heard of Sir George Bullough and checked he lived at the address given. He released the jewellry against his cheque. The cheque was dishonoured, but the jewelry had … Continue reading Phillips v Brooks Ltd: 1919
The House considered what was required to establish an ‘intent to defraud’. Held: Lord Radcliffe said: ‘Now, I think that there are one or two things that can be said with confidence about the meaning of this word ‘ defraud ‘. It requires a person as its object: that is, defrauding involves doing something to … Continue reading Welham v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1961
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception to state immunity. Held: The Kingdom’s appeal succeeded. The protection of state immunity was essentially a … Continue reading Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others: HL 14 Jun 2006
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was obtained, but the court ordered the remaining … Continue reading Lehtimaki and Others v Cooper: SC 29 Jul 2020
The landowner had developed land which was then made the subject of compulsory purchase. The court was asked how the compensation was to be calculated. The landowner expected to sell the development as a whole. The respondent argued that the profit which a purchaser would build into that purchase should affect the compensation. Held: The … Continue reading Ryde International Plc v London Regional Transport: CA 5 Mar 2004
A private seller had parted with his car in return for a worthless cheque to a rogue who persuaded him that he was the well-known actor who played Robin Hood on television, and who sold it on to the defendant. Held: ‘When two parties have come to a contract – or rather what appears, on … Continue reading Lewis v Averay: CA 22 Jul 1971
The court considered correct approach to determination of the rateable value of an office building, in circumstances where the evidence showed at the relevant time a general demand in the area for comparable office buildings, but no actual tenant willing to pay a positive price for the building itself. Held: (Briggs, Black LL dissenting) The … Continue reading Telereal Trillium v Hewitt (Valuation Officer): SC 15 May 2019
HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Transaction in securities – Purchase of securities by company from shareholder – Finance A ct 1960 (8 and 9 Eliz. 2, c. 44), ss. 28 and 43. [1967] UKHL TC – 44 – 399, [1967] 2 WLR 1271, [1968] AC 766, 44 TC 399, [1967] 2 All ER 48 … Continue reading Inland Revenue Commissioners v Cleary: HL 15 Mar 1967
Cere Needed Releasing Future Claims A compromise agreement which appeared to claim to settle all outstanding claims between the employee and employer, did not prevent the employee later claiming for stigma losses where, at the time of the agreement, the circumstances which might lead to a claim were unknown to either party, and such losses … Continue reading Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali, Khan and others (No 1); BCCI v Ali: HL 1 Mar 2001
An assessment to income tax had been raised after the employee resold shares in the company issued through the employees’ share scheme at a price which the Revenue said was above the share value. The company appealed against a finding that tax was payable. Held: The appeal failed. The Revenue should calculate the price which … Continue reading Grays Timber Products Ltd v Revenue and Customs: SC 3 Feb 2010
Necessity for Reference to ECJ Lord Denning said that the test for whether a question should be referred to the European Court of Justice is one of necessity, not desirability or convenience. There are cases where the point, if decided one way, would shorten the trial greatly. But if decided the other way, it would … Continue reading HP Bulmer Ltd and Another v J Bollinger Sa and others: CA 22 May 1974
The land-owner appealed by case stated against an assessment to unoccupied, non-domestic rate demands. The land-owner said that they were unoccupied through dilapidations and therefore exempt. They said that the court had wrongly disregarded their evidence that it would be an offence for the properties to be occupied in their condition. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Pall Mall Investments (London) Ltd v Gloucester City Council: Admn 8 Jul 2014
