England and Wales Case Law

Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v MR Currell Ltd

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.

• Paye liability
• Employee benefit trusts
• Taxation of loans to employees
• Income tax (earnings and pensions) act 2003
• National insurance contributions
• Emoluments and earnings

Read case analysis

The Commissioners for HMRC v MR Currell Limited

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.

• Income tax on employment income
• Paye
• Employee benefit trusts
• Loans to employees
• Remuneration
• Disguised remuneration

Read case analysis

Allan Jack v The Commissioners for HMRC

Amounts transferred from AML to the EBT during 2010/11 are taxable on Mr Jack as employment earnings under s62 ITEPA 2003, regardless of the loan charge provisions or subsequent repayment.

Source excerpt

• Income tax
• Employee benefit trusts
• Disguised remuneration
• Loan charge
• Closure notice

Read case analysis

Fluid System Technologies (Scotland) Limited & Anor, R (on the application of) v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Upper Tribunal refused judicial review of HMRC’s DRRS repayment refusals, holding HMRC had power to recover the disputed sums and the claimants had not made reasonable disclosure.

• Disguised remuneration
• Loan charge
• Repayment scheme
• Judicial review
• Statutory interpretation
• Reasonable disclosure

Read case analysis

Binoy Joseph v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal held that HMRC was entitled to issue a taxpayer notice under Schedule 36 to check the appellant’s income tax position, as the information sought was reasonably required in the context of possible untaxed earnings from employment. However, the original notice was too broad and unclear, so the Tribunal varied it to limit the scope to information directly relevant to the appellant’s earnings and tax position for the year in question.

Source excerpt

• Schedule 36 information notice
• Disguised remuneration
• Paye compliance
• Taxpayer notice
• Third party notice
• Reasonably required criterion

Read case analysis

RK Hosking v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider the validity of the trust or the information notice in a penalty appeal. The only relevant questions are compliance with the notice, validity of the penalty, and reasonable excuse. The status of the trust and related proceedings are irrelevant to these questions. The application for a stay is refused.

Source excerpt

• Information notice
• Penalty for non-compliance
• Disguised remuneration
• Trust validity
• Case management stay

Read case analysis

Wired Orthodontics Limited & Ors v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Upper Tribunal refused permission to appeal in a disguised remuneration tax dispute involving gold bullion, earnings, section 222 ITEPA, and deductibility.

• Employment benefits
• Paye income tax
• National insurance contributions
• Corporation tax deduction
• Readily convertible assets
• Duality of purpose

Read case analysis

Owen Patrick Williams v The Commissioners for HMRC

The tribunal held that only the 2017/18 Closure Notice was appealable, allowed the appeal in part on a £200,918 repayment claim, and struck out the rest.

• Closure notice
• Appealable decisions
• Jurisdiction of tribunal
• Self-assessment tax return
• Disguised remuneration
• Loan charge

Read case analysis

Cartref Care Home Ltd & Ors, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue and Customs

Cartref Care Home Ltd & Ors, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue and Customs [2020] EWCA Civ 1744 (18 December 2020)

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in a challenge to HMRC’s Loan Charge, holding the retrospective taxation issue had become academic after 2020 amendments.

• Retrospective taxation
• Disguised remuneration
• Loan charge
• Compatibility with echr
• Judicial review procedure
• Costs orders

Read case analysis

Cartref Care Home Ltd & Ors, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue and Customs

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in a challenge to the Loan Charge, holding the key issues academic after legislation was amended.

• Retrospective taxation
• Disguised remuneration
• Loan charge
• Judicial review procedure
• Declaration of incompatibility
• Costs orders

Read case analysis