Van Der Merwe v Goldman & Anor [2016] EWHC 926 (Ch) (22 April 2016)

Van Der Merwe v Goldman & Anor [2016] EWHC 926 (Ch) (22 April 2016)

The transactions were set aside as voluntary settlements affected by mistake, not contracts. HMRC's grounds for appeal lacked realistic prospects of success. The case was not suitable for a leapfrog appeal certificate. HMRC should pay Claimant's costs relating to pleadings and part of trial, but not two sets of costs.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 926 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Philip Anton van der Merwe; First Defendant: Deborah Lynne Goldman; Second Defendant: The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Written Submissions Following Hand Down of Judgment / Post Judgment Orders and Applications
Outcome
Orders made to set aside relevant transactions. Permission to appeal refused. Leapfrog certificate refused. Costs awarded to Claimant as specified; no order as to costs for First Defendant.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Transactions, Mistake in Equity, Costs, Permission to Appeal, Leapfrog Appeal, Public Policy
Equity Trusts Mistake Civil Procedure Setting Aside Transactions Mistake in Equity Costs Permission to Appeal +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Anton van der Merwe

Claimant

Deborah Lynne Goldman

First Defendant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Written Submissions Following Hand Down of Judgment / Post Judgment Orders and Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Order to give effect to judgment
  2. 2 HMRC's application for permission to appeal
  3. 3 HMRC's application for certificate under section 12 Administration of Justice Act 1969

Ratio Decidendi

The transactions were set aside as voluntary settlements affected by mistake, not contracts. HMRC's grounds for appeal lacked realistic prospects of success. The case was not suitable for a leapfrog appeal certificate. HMRC should pay Claimant's costs relating to pleadings and part of trial, but not two sets of costs.

Court Disposition

Orders made to set aside relevant transactions. Permission to appeal refused. Leapfrog certificate refused. Costs awarded to Claimant as specified; no order as to costs for First Defendant.

Orders

  • Set aside transfer of 24 March 2006 and settlement and transfer of 27 March 2006.
  • HMRC to pay Claimant's costs of Points of Dispute, Points of Reply, Further Information.