Bluedell 5,624 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 I think that an appeal will be granted for the following 2 reasons: 1. It's a UK wide matter and I'm not sure that the Scottish judges would want to be seen be setting the precedent and refusing an appeal, when a similar case could go through the English courts in the future. 2. It is an issue of general public importance to an extent, given that there are a large number of EBTs out there, and to a lesser extent, the high profile nature of the case. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 In previous judgements the right to appeal was given when the verdict was first announced.I can't believe leave to appeal would not be granted The right to appeal was automatic (or relatively so) in previous cases, I believe, but it's different when it reaches the inner house of the court of session. The fact that previous appeals were made will not be considered in the decision making process. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 (edited) Found this on FF ... BDO submit tax case appeal New powers for Scotland's appeal court come into force 22 Sep 2015 Legal appeals in civil cases from Scotland decided from today (22 September) will now need permission from judges before they reach the UK's highest court, following changes made in the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014. The provisions mean that a party wishing to overturn decisions of the Inner House of the Court of Session, Scotland's upper appeal court, made after 22 September 2015 must now ask that Court for permission before seeking to bring a further appeal to the UK Supreme Court. If the Inner House refuses permission, a party can then ask the Supreme Court directly for permission to appeal. Such permission will normally only be given if the appeal raises a point of general public importance, and in deciding whether it does, the Supreme Court will benefit from the Inner House's view on whether an appeal should be given permission to proceed. Previously, appellants from Scotland had an automatic right of appeal in civil matters, provided that two advocates certified an appeal as reasonable. In effect, the changes - passed by the Scottish Parliament in October 2014 - mean that appeals from Scotland to the Supreme Court will now be subject to the same rules as appeals from other parts of the UK. In the financial year 2014/15, the Supreme Court received ten appeals or references from Scotland 'as of right', and received five applications for permission to appeal where the appellant needed to seek such permission (typically in relation to 'devolution issues'). In 2013/14, the figures were 13 appeals as of right, and three applications for permission to appeal. The changes do not alter the position regarding appeals in criminal matters: the High Court of Justiciary remains the final court of appeal for such matters, except in limited circumstances where the appeal raised questions of compatibility with European law or the European Convention on Human Rights. Even in these cases, once it has settled the point of law, the Supreme Court must remit the matter to the High Court of Justiciary for the case to be concluded. Similarly, the reforms do not affect civil devolution issue appeals, the procedures for which are set out in the Scotland Act 2012. https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/new-powers-for-Scotlands-appeal-court-in-force-today.html Edited November 30, 2015 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,830 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Read somewhere ( here ?) that this would not be classed as requiring a quick decision and that it could be 2017 before getting to court. Court is still deciding on cases from 2013!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Found this on FF ... Which was taken from post 10 of this thread 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Which was taken from post 10 of this thread Ooohh You enjoyed that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Which was taken from post 10 of this thread Ah but some only believe something if it's on FF not here! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,744 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Which was taken from post 10 of this thread Which I noted from the poster's name ... after C&Ping it here. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,721 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Rangers liquidators confident of victory if EBT appeal goes ahead The clubs' oldco liquidators have asked for leave to appeal the long standing Ibrox ‘Big Tax Case’ By Roddy Forsyth 6:15PM GMT 30 Nov 2015 Rangers’ oldco liquidators have asked for leave to appeal the long standing Ibrox ‘Big Tax Case’ – as it has become known – to the Supreme Court in London, as exclusively revealed by Telegraph Sport. If leave to appeal is granted by the Court of Session in Edinburgh, the debate about the propriety of 15 honours won by Rangers between 2001 and 2011 will be shelved for at least another year. The issue concerns Rangers’ use of EBTs (Employment Benefit Trusts) during that period to enhance the contracts of players and other employees. HMRC has been vexed by the avoidance ploy for 15 years and brought in legislation in respect of disguised remuneration in 2011 to close the loopholes which the creators of EBT schemes had attempted to exploit to reduce the tax burden on their clients. BDO, representing the Rangers oldco which was liquidated in the summer of 2012, won the first two lower tribunal hearings which adjudicated on HMRC’s claim. However, the tax authority at last achieved a favourable return from the Court of Session earlier this month, when Lord Carloway, sitting with Lord Menzies and Lord Drummond Young, ruled that if income was derived from employees’ services, in their capacity as employees, it was an emolument or earnings and, in the words of the judgment, "thus assessable to income tax". Lord Drummond Young made the observation that if EBTs had not been in operation at Ibrox certain players "might well have taken their services elsewhere", a remark that fuelled renewed clamour amongst supporters of rival clubs to have Rangers stripped of the five Scottish championships, four Scottish Cup successes and six Scottish League Cup triumphs achieved while the avoidance scheme was in operation. However, it is believed that one argument against the supposition that Rangers secured players by means of EVTs is that a range of variable inducements were in operation at that time and not only at Ibrox. Other avoidance schemes involved investment in such vehicles as film production companies and forestry development. Last week the former Dutch international midfielder, Ronald de Boer – now manager of Ajax – said of his decision to move to Ibrox in 2000: "At that time, I could also have gone to Manchester United but I chose Rangers. “That was with my heart and not only for the money. I played with all my heart for Rangers. It was the same (money at United) but I was afraid for my knee at that time and Rangers gave me a four-year deal whereas United gave me three years.” Lord Drummond Young also remarked that the Court of Session ruling accorded with “common sense”. It is thought that this observation will be disputed in the appeal to the Supreme Court if leave is granted to take the case to the next level. Telegraph Sport also understands that opinion amongst London legal experts holds that BDO has a strong chance of having the Court of Session verdict overturned should the matter be heard for a fourth time and that it was a certainty that the liquidators would appeal from the moment the Edinburgh decision was published. A statement from BDO today said: “Following discussions with the company's legal advisers and the liquidation committee, the joint liquidators have filed an application seeking leave to appeal the Inner House of the Court of Session decision in respect of the EBT case. "If the company successfully obtains leave to appeal, the appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court in London. The joint liquidators are not in a position at this stage to make any further comment in respect of the appeal." It was Telegraph Sport which first revealed that several Premier League clubs in England, including Arsenal, had agreed settlements with HMRC in respect of EBT and other tax avoidance schemes. Celtic are the only club in Scotland, apart from Rangers, who are known to have used an EBT contract. They did so for Juninho, who played for the Parkhead side in 2004-05, and who received his cash after he left the club, unlike those at Ibrox who were beneficiaries while still playing there. Meanwhile, following another Telegraph Sport exclusive the bookmakers installed Mark Warburton as favourite to end Fulham’s long search for a successor to Kit Symons. The Rangers manager, however, distanced himself from the Craven Cottage club’s latest move. "It's very flattering. It's always good to be linked. “There are lots of times in your life when you're not linked to jobs, that's for sure. All you can do is put your head down and do your job here. The amount of clubs who change their managers down south is increasing year on year. "I'm the Rangers manager. It's a huge club here. There's some big clubs in the English Championship - there's no doubt about that - but this is a huge club.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/12025850/Rangers-liquidators-confident-of-victory-if-EBT-appeal-goes-ahead.html 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,721 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Which was taken from post 10 of this thread Aye, by me!,I post some form here to FF and vice versa!. 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.