Mercury Tax Group Limited v HMRC: Difference between revisions

Mercury Tax Group Limited v HMRC (view source)

Revision as of 08:15, 15 December 2022

2 bytes added , 15 December 2022

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,975

edits

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 This sounds a bit squiffy. Some of the changes between draft and final were [[blob]]s — there is something to be said that these imply some sort of forward consent to the later insertion of variables — but others were substantial changes, “unheralded by any blanks or square brackets in the drafts”
-{{quote|“The Claimants say that the procedure followed – i.e. of obtaining the client's signature to a draft but subsequently transferring it to the final version – is ordinary office practice and wholly unobjectionable. HMRC say that it impugns the essential validity of the documents; and, further, that it is and was reasonable to suspect that the Claimants were aware that this was so but hoped to conceal from them that they had proceeded in this way.”}}
+{{quote|“The Claimants say that the procedure followed – i.e. of obtaining the client’s signature to a draft but subsequently transferring it to the final version – is ordinary office practice and wholly unobjectionable. HMRC say that it impugns the essential validity of the documents; and, further, that it is and was reasonable to suspect that the Claimants were aware that this was so but hoped to conceal from them that they had proceeded in this way.”}}
 The claimants pointed to extraneous correspondence that indicated that the client knew about and acceded to the variations, such that it implicitly, if not expressly, authorised those changes, and failing that that the changes were, from the customer’s point of view, immaterial.