swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Stamp Duty - From: 1930 To: 1959
This page lists 11 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Salvesen's Trustees v Inland Revenue Commissioners; SCS 1930 - 1930 SLT 387
Oswald Tillotson Limited v ORC [1933] 1 KB 134
1933
Stamp Duty
"When I come to consider the purpose of this section, and to see why there is to be immunity and exemption from transfer stamp duty, I find that it is because the old company is really represented or replaced by the new company, and the shareholders in the new company are to be in substance the shareholders of the old company. It is because there has been not an out-an-out transfer for cash but merely a reconstitution of the same corporators in a new company. Bearing that principle in mind and realising that the test is to see whether or not there is a real identity as to not less than 90% of the shareholders, I come to the conclusion that the meaning of the word "issue" is something more than the mere giving of an allotment letter to an old shareholder enabling him to vote with the shares offered to him at his valition."
Finance Act 1927 55(1)
1 Citers
Munro v Commissioner for Stamp Duties [1934] AC 61; [1933] All ER Rep 185
1933
PC
Lord Tomlin
Stamp Duty, Commonwealth
In 1909, the deceased orally agreed with his six children that he and they would carry on the business of graziers on land owned by him as partners under a partnership at will. In 1913 the deceased transferred by way of gift the freehold interest in portions of the land to each of his four sons and to trustees for each of his two daughters and their children. The transfers were taken subject to the partnership agreement. In 1919 the deceased and his children entered into a formal partnership agreement, which provided that during his lifetime no partner should withdraw from the partnership. On the deceased's death in 1929 a claim for death duties was made in respect of the land transferred to his children in 1913. Held: The gift had been subject to the rights of the partnership, so that the donor's occupation was by virtue of property which had never been included in the gift.
Lord Tomlin said: "It is unnecessary to determine the precise nature of the right of the partnership at the time of the transfers. It was either a tenancy during the term of the partnership or a licence coupled with an interest. In either view what was comprised in the gift was, in the case of each of the gifts to the children and the trustees, the property shorn of the right which belonged to the partnership, and upon this footing it is in their Lordships' opinion plain that the donee in each case assumed bona fide possession and enjoyment of the gift immediately upon the gift and thenceforward retained it to the exclusion of the donor."
1 Citers
Munro and Others v The Commissioner of Stamp Duties; PC 12-Oct-1933 - [1933] UKPC 68
Commissioner of Stamp Duties of New South Wales v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd [1943] AC 425
1943
PC
Lord Russell of Killowen
Stamp Duty, Commonwealth
The Board consideerd the application of the retention of benefit rules. Lord Russell of Killowen said: "the entire exclusion of the donor from . . enjoyment which is contemplated . . is entire exclusion from . . enjoyment of the beneficial interest in property which has been given by the gift, and . . enjoyment by the donor of some beneficial interest therein which he has not included in the gift is not inconsistent with the entire exclusion from . . enjoyment which the sub-section requires."
1 Cites
1 Citers
Oakes v Commissioner of Stamp Duties of New South Wales [1954] AC 57; [1953] 2 All ER 92
1953
PC
Lord Reid
Commonwealth, Stamp Duty
A father made a gift of land in favour of himself and his four children in equal shares but then retained wide powers of management for which he reserved the right to charge remuneration. Held: The donor was entirely excluded from the subject-matter of the gift, which was the four fifths interest given to the children, and that his retention of powers of management did not affect the matter. This was because the donor is entirely excluded if he only holds the property in a fiduciary capacity and deals with it in accordance with his fiduciary duty. But the right to charge remuneration was a different matter. This amounted to a benefit to the donor by contract or otherwise.
Lord Reid referred to St Aubin and said: "it is now clear that it is not sufficient to bring a case within the scope of these sections to take the situation as a whole and find that the settlor has continued to enjoy substantial advantages which have some relation to the settled property ; it is necessary to consider the nature and source of each of these advantages and determine whether or not it is a benefit of such a kind as to come within the scope of the section"
1 Cites
1 Citers
The Commissioner of Stamp Duties of The State New South Wales V. Hazel May Pearce and Others v Hazel May Pearce and Others V. The Commissioner of Stamp Duties of The State New South Wales (Consolidated Appeals) (Australia) [1953] UKPC 36
9 Dec 1953
PC
Commonwealth, Stamp Duty
[ Bailii ]
Phillip Rice v The Commissioner of Stamp Duties etc (Consolidated Appeals) [1954] UKPC 9; [1954] TR 259; (1954) 33 ATC 228; [1954] AC 216; [1954] 2 WLR 460
23 Feb 1954
PC
Stamp Duty
(Fiji)
[ Bailii ]
Commissioner of Stamp Duties v The New Zealand Insurance Company Limited [1956] UKPC 5
15 Feb 1956
PC
Commonwealth, Stamp Duty
New Zealand
[ Bailii ]
Grey and Another (Hunter's Nominees) v Inland Revenue Commissioners; Orse Gray v IRC; HL 2-Nov-1959 - [1959] UKHL 2; [1960] AC 1; [1959] 3 All ER 603
Oughtred v Inland Revenue Commissioners; HL 4-Nov-1959 - [1959] UKHL 3; [1960] AC 206