Affirmed. A single one off lump sum payment was found to be an emolument without consideration as to whether or not it was a capital payment. Miss Hamblett ‘received her payment as a recognition of the fact that she had lost certain rights as an employee, and by reason of the further fact that she had elected to remain in her employment at GCHQ.’
Judges:
Neill LJ
Citations:
[1987] 1 All ER 916, [1986] 59 TC 694
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Hamblett v Godfrey (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 1986
A single one off lump sum payment was found to be an emolument without consideration as to whether or not it was of capital. . .
Cited by:
Distinguished – Shilton v Wilmshurst (Inspector of Taxes) CA 1990
The taxpayer was a goalkeeper employed by Nottingham Forest Football Club. On his transfer to Southampton, he was paid pounds 75,000. The revenue appealed a finding that this was not taxable under Schedule E.
Held: To be taxcable it had to be . .
Considered – Shilton v Wilmshurst HL 7-Feb-1991
The taxpayer was transferred from one football club to another. He was paid andpound;75,000 to persuade him to move. The revenue appealed a decision that this was not a sum taxable as an emolument under Schedule E by the new employer.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Income Tax
Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.199544
