The revenue had required production of the taxpayer’s documents held on his behalf by his solicitors, who now applied for judicial review, claiming the protection of section 20.
Held: The protection given to a taxpayer for documents held by him did not extend to documents held for him by his lawyers. The court pointed out however that the revenue remained under a duty to give reasons for a request, and might still suffer judicial review in appropriate circumstances.
Judges:
Munby J
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 81 (Admin), Times 12-Feb-2007
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .
Cited – Regina v Lancashire County Council ex parte Huddleston CA 1986
The respondent council had failed to allocate a university student grant to the claimant and the principle was directed at the duty of that authority to state clearly the reasons for its refusal and the particular factors that had been taken into . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Taxes Management, Legal Professions
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.250588