Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Stringer v HMRC; Court: European Court of Justice: Citations [2009] UKHL 31, [2009] IRLR 214 (also, C-520/06 and C-350/06) Case history; Prior action [2005] EWCA Civ 441: Keywords; Working Time Directive
HMRC could issue a post-clearance demand (in respect of customs duty) after the expiry of the normal three year time limit where criminal proceedings were relevant. However, HMRC cannot issue demands unitarily without any time limit as this would be in breach of the fundamental principle of legal certainty under EU law. [1]
Returns must be submitted and paid by 31 January - or individuals can face fines from HMRC. ... Students sue Education Department, allege DOGE is accessing private data. Sports. Sports.
, describing Stephens as "a throwback to the postwar liberal Republican [U.S. Supreme Court] appointees", questioned the validity of "the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which holds that you cannot sue any state or federal government agency, or any of its officers or employees, for any wrong they may have committed against you, unless the state ...
HMRC argued that at a creditors’ meeting to approve a prepack insolvency for the Mercury Tax Group Ltd it should have been given £8m worth of votes, rather than £1.5m admitted by the chairman, Edward Klempka. He was an insolvency practitioner appointed by Mercury’s directors, and was attempting to effect a sale of the business to the ...
The next administration's tariff plans could quickly become a focus of lawsuits that are sure to mean more uncertainty for businesses trying to weigh the effects of a second round of Trump trade ...
You can find instant answers on our AOL Mail help page. Should you need additional assistance we have experts available around the clock at 800-730-2563. Should you need additional assistance we have experts available around the clock at 800-730-2563.
Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1993] AC 70 is an English unjust enrichment law case, concerning to what extent enrichment of the defendant must be at the expense of the claimant.