Styles v Treasurer of Middle Temple [1903] 4 TC 123
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-07 18:09:14 UTC
Wills J
I am rather disposed to repudiate the notion of there being any artificial distinction between the rules to be applied to a taxing Act and the rules to be applied to any other Act.
I do not think such artificial distinctions can help anybody arrive at the plain meaning of words.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Mangin v IRC
The words are to be given their ordinary meaning. They are not to be given some other meaning simply because their object is to frustrate legitimate tax avoidance devices. Moral precepts are not appl...
Latilla v IRC
Of recent years much ingenuity has been expended in certain quarters in attempting to devise methods of disposition of income by which those who were prepared to adopt them might enjoy the benefits o...
IRC v McGuckian
The new development was not based on a linguistic analysis of the meaning of particular words in a statute. It was founded on a broad purposive interpretation, giving effect to the intention of Parli...
Partington v AG
If the subject comes within the letter or the law he must be taxed, however great the hardship may appear to be. On the other hand, if the Crown, seeking to recover the tax, cannot bring the subject...
MacNiven v Westmoreland Investments Ltd
Judges lacked the constitutional authority to develop an overriding legal principle. Instead, if the new approach is to be justified, it needs to be shown in each case precisely why it is that statut...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.