header-logo header-logo

15 December 2011
Issue: 7494 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Bankruptcy

Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Harris [2011] EWHC 3094 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 52 (Dec)

It was settled law that the bankruptcy court would not go behind a tax assessment for the purposes of determining the existence or amount of a proof of debt. The assessment gave rise to a statutory debt and any challenge was to be made through the machinery laid down in the taxes legislation. That principle was applicable, inter alia, on the hearing of a bankruptcy petition where the debtor sought to challenge a petition debt derived from an assessment which had not been successfully appealed. Although most of the cases in the area dealt with income tax assessments, the same principles applied in relation to VAT assessments.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

19 promotions across national offices, including two new partners

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Partner promoted to head of corporate team

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Chester office expansion accelerates with triple appointment

NEWS
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has reignited debate over what exactly counts as the ‘conduct of litigation’ in modern legal practice
A controversial High Court financial remedies ruling has reignited debate over secrecy, non-disclosure and fairness in divorce proceedings involving hidden wealth
Britain’s deferred prosecution agreement regime is undergoing a significant shift, with prosecutors placing renewed emphasis on corporate cooperation, reform and early self-reporting
The High Court has upheld the Metropolitan Police’s live facial recognition policy, rejecting claims that its deployment unlawfully interferes with privacy and protest rights
As AI chatbots increasingly provide legal and commercial advice, English law is beginning to confront who should bear responsibility when automated systems get things wrong
back-to-top-scroll