Glyn v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 645 (TC) (08 November 2013)

Glyn v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 645 (TC) (08 November 2013)

The Tribunal found the Appellant had effected a distinct break from the UK by relocating to Monaco, significantly loosening family and social ties, abandoning his former business life, and not maintaining a habitual abode or abode for a settled purpose in the UK. The retention and use of 50 Circus Road did not amount to continued residence. Accordingly, the Appellant was non-UK resident in 2005/2006.

Citation
[2013] UKFTT 645
Parties
Appellant: James Glyn; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Income Tax, Residence Status, Non UK Residence, Tax Avoidance, Corporation Tax
Tax Law Income Tax Residence Status Non UK Residence Tax Avoidance Corporation Tax

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Glyn

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Income Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant was non-UK resident in the tax year 2005-2006
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant effected a 'definite break' from the UK
  3. 3 Whether retention and use of the UK home constituted a habitual abode for a settled purpose

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found the Appellant had effected a distinct break from the UK by relocating to Monaco, significantly loosening family and social ties, abandoning his former business life, and not maintaining a habitual abode or abode for a settled purpose in the UK. The retention and use of 50 Circus Road did not amount to continued residence. Accordingly, the Appellant was non-UK resident in 2005/2006.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The Appellant is to be treated as non-UK resident for the tax year 2005/2006.