header-logo header-logo

05 May 2011 / Jonathan Levy , Daniel Hemming
Issue: 7464 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

An objective approach

Constitutional not financial imperatives should dictate the attitudes of judges in tax disputes, say Jonathan Levy & Daniel Hemming

The Treasury and HMRC are engaged in a concerted attempt to close the “tax gap”. Politicians speak daily of the evils of tax avoidance and tax evasion (the terms tend to be used interchangeably) and the necessity for everyone to pay their “fair share” of tax, while HMRC has made numerous public pronouncements about “acceptable” and “unacceptable” tax avoidance. It is against this backdrop and during a period of economic austerity that the tribunals and the higher courts are being asked to determine tax disputes.

What are a judge’s duties?

Given that the UK does not have a written constitution, there is no single, codified source which determines the powers, duties and responsibilities of our judges. Instead they are derived from an amalgam of statute and often very old common law.

The Judges’ Council (chaired by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge) publishes the Guide to Judicial Conduct (the guide), which is intended

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll