Following the Upper Tribunal decision in HMRC v Taylor & Haimendorf [2011] STC 126 HMRC applied for costs of £17 990 including a claim for £8 010 in respect of 38 hours’ attendance on documents. The shareholders objected to HMRC’s claims. In HMRC v Taylor; HMRC v Haimendorf (Upper Tribunal – 4 March) the Upper Tribunal held that HMRC were entitled to reasonable costs but that the claim for £8 010 was excessive and reduced the amount in question to £925 (representing five hours’ work by a grade C lawyer and one hour by a grade A lawyer). The Tribunal therefore awarded HMRC total costs of £10 905.
Why it matters: The successful party in an appeal to the Upper Tribunal is entitled to reasonable costs but it is possible to object to the amount of costs claimed where...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Following the Upper Tribunal decision in HMRC v Taylor & Haimendorf [2011] STC 126 HMRC applied for costs of £17 990 including a claim for £8 010 in respect of 38 hours’ attendance on documents. The shareholders objected to HMRC’s claims. In HMRC v Taylor; HMRC v Haimendorf (Upper Tribunal – 4 March) the Upper Tribunal held that HMRC were entitled to reasonable costs but that the claim for £8 010 was excessive and reduced the amount in question to £925 (representing five hours’ work by a grade C lawyer and one hour by a grade A lawyer). The Tribunal therefore awarded HMRC total costs of £10 905.
Why it matters: The successful party in an appeal to the Upper Tribunal is entitled to reasonable costs but it is possible to object to the amount of costs claimed where...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
