boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 They have now moved on to a stated case, Heaton v Bell from 1970. It's all very dry and to do with income tax due on cars provided to employees. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 (edited) It's interesting to note that Rangers obsessed, The Clumpany is tweeting furiously right now at the same time as the tarred one, as promised is out of range "for the next 2 or 3 days". Yet more proof, despite his denials about holding conversations with himself, that they are one and the same person. Edited March 15, 2017 by boabie 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 The old chap speaking now is who exactly? Must have some stamina if he does that standing stuff throughout ... Andrew Thornhill QC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 The main gist of what Thornhill is saying seems to be; if the employer makes a payment to the wife/sister or whatever of an employee then it is a benefit in kind and subject to tax. He is maintaining that payments were made to a trust fund which the employee could use when and if he wanted BUT remains a loan which can be called in. He's working furiously to hammer that point home. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 Strange hearing the female judge admit that this is a subject "new to me". What's going on ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,429 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 Andrew Thornhill QC The author, with Paul Baxendale-Walker, of the definitive legal text on EBTs, now out of print, and of merely historic interest, and the silk who has represented our side since the earliest days, if memory serves. To say that he is steeped in the subject may be to do him a disservice. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 5,164 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 I'm not liking this. Lord Hodge is against us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchorman 0 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 Anyone know when the 'verdict' is likely to be delivered? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 5,164 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 Strange hearing the female judge admit that this is a subject "new to me".What's going on ? It means she will follow the majority opinion. If it's divided two for and two against God knows what she'll do. Actually, what she'll do is work it out for herself. A woman of formidable intellectual capacity. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,429 Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 The chap to Thornhill's right, seated, and fiddling with pens and stuff, bears more than a passing resemblance to Craig Whyte.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.