Wilson (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Clayton: ChD 29 Apr 2004

Taxability of compensation paid on compromise of claims after dismissal. The employer introduced new terms, withdrawing car benefits. Having refused the new terms the taxpayer was dismissed. A tribunal held him unfairly dismissed. The council re-instated him and others and made a compensatory payment. The Revenue contended that the re-instatement made the payment taxable.
Held: The cases of Hochstrasser and Wilmshurst set the test for what wa staxable pay. This payment resulted from a negotiated settlement, and was directly consequential of the dismissal and finding of unfair dismissal. The payment was not taxable because it was under andpound;30,000.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Patten

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 898 (Ch), Times 07-Jun-2004, Gazette 13-May-2004, [2004] STC 1022

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 148

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedShilton 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: . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromWilson (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Clayton CA 7-Dec-2004
The claim against the defendant at the tribunal had been settled by a compromise which had then been the subject of an order by the tribunal. The Revenue sought to charge the payment to income tax.
Held: It had been paid ‘in connection with’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Employment

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196104