The Revenue had published a booklet, IR20, setting out their approach to the interpretation of the phrases ‘residence’ and ‘ordinary residence’. The taxpayer said that this was a more generous definition than the statutory one, and that having acted on it he had a legitimate expectation that the booklet’s interpretation would continue to be applied.
Held: The appeals failed (Lord Mance dissenting). The interpretations argued for by the taxpayers of the IL20 guidance did not apply. To lose British residence there had to be a ‘distinct break’ with life in the UK. This requred a multifactorial assessment, amongst which the taking of a permanent employment will carry geat weight. HMRC was bound by the guidance, but it was not as suggested.
Judges:
Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson
Citations:
[2011] UKSC 47
Links:
Statutes:
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 334
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At SCIT – Gaines-Cooper v Revenue and Customs SCIT 31-Oct-2006
SCIT INCOME TAX – preliminary issues – domicile, residence and ordinary residence in tax years 1992/93 to 2003/2004 – Appellant purchased house in the Seychelles in 1975 and obtained a residency permit in 1976 – . .
At High Court – Gaines-Cooper v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 13-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the domicile of the tax-payer. He had a domicile of origin in the UK, but asserted that he had acquired a domicile of choice in the Seychelles. The Special Commissioners had allowed, in assessing the domicile at any time, of . .
Appeal from – Gaines-Cooper v Revenue and Customs CA 23-Oct-2008
Renewed application for permission to pursue a second appeal in order to challenge an order of Lewison J, dated 13 November 2007, upholding a decision of the Special Commissioners that the appellant was domiciled in England and Wales in the relevant . .
Cited – Levene v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1928
Until 1919 Mr. Levene had been both resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. Then, for five years he spent about five months (mainly in the summer) each year, staying in hotels in the UK and receiving medical attention or pursuing religious and . .
Appeal from – Davies and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs CA 16-Feb-2010
The parties disputed the interpretation of a booklet issued by the Revenue (IR20) as it defined the phrase ‘ordinarily resident’. In particular the taxpayer complained of an unannounced change of practice made after they had arranged their lives . .
Applied – Reed v Clark ChD 1986
The taxpayer defendant (C) had been both resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. He moved to Los Angeles in 1978 making his home and business there until May 1979, when, not having set foot in the UK in the interim, he returned to reside in the . .
Cited – Regina v Barnet London Borough Council, Ex parte Shah HL 16-Dec-1982
The five applicants had lived in the UK for at least three years while attending school or college. All five were subject to immigration control, four had entered as students with limited leave to remain for the duration of their studies, and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Taxes Management, Capital Gains Tax
Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.447485