Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Upper Tribunal dismissed Aramark’s appeal about secondary Class 1 NICs, holding that the host employer provision applied and that Bilfinger was not wrong.
The Tribunal allowed Mr Gadsden’s appeal, holding that his late Class 2 National Insurance payments could be treated as paid because his ignorance was not due to a lack of due care and diligence.
The sums received by the shareholders (except for the Fourth Shares) were taxable as employment income under Chapter 3D of Part 7 ITEPA 2003 because the shares were employment-related securities acquired by reason of employment, and the consideration exceeded the market value, which was determined on a pro rata basis of the total consideration paid by the purchaser. The appellant was careless in failing to account for income tax and NICs on the excess, and the HMRC determination was validly made within the six-year time limit due to such carelessness. The appeal was allowed only in respect of…
Source excerpt
The Tribunal held that PGMOL’s match engagements with National Group referees were contracts for services, not employment, so the PAYE and NIC appeals succeeded.
WGENS is a host employer under the Host Employer Provision of the 1978 Regulations because WGOS employees' personal service was made available to and rendered for the purposes of WGENS's business; the statutory criteria are met and WGENS is liable for NICs.
Source excerpt
Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v MR Currell Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 445 (17 April 2026)
The Court of Appeal dismissed HMRC’s appeal, holding that a genuine, repayable loan funded through an employee benefit trust was not taxable earnings under section 62 ITEPA.
The Court of Appeal dismissed HMRC’s appeal over whether an EBT-funded loan to a director counted as earnings. The genuine repayable loan was not taxable remuneration.
The Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal only on the ground that the First-tier Tribunal heard the tax appeal in Mr Strange’s absence, and refused the other grounds.
The Upper Tribunal held that Mr Ali was not entitled to Bereavement Support Payment because his late wife had not paid enough qualifying national insurance contributions.
The Upper Tribunal dismissed Bilfinger Salamis UK’s appeal on secondary Class 1 NICs, holding that “made available” in the host employer provision bears its ordinary meaning.
Explore more
