Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

National Crime Agency begins criminal investigation into Arron Banks

  • Thread starter Deleted 158059
  • Start date
Schadenfreude.

Nelson_Ha-Ha.jpg


'Brexit bankroller Arron Banks has lost his latest attempt to avoid paying inheritance tax by using EU and human rights law. For a number of years, Banks has been contesting an outstanding inheritance tax bill of £162,945, levied on donations (amounting to £976,781) he made to UKIP.

'Banks argued that the tax claim was a breach of his human rights and a breach of EU law. Specifically, Banks argued that it breached Article 1 of the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that people have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, and for them not to be taken unjustly.

'Banks lost an appeal in November on this case, and lawyer Jolyon Maugham has today reported that the Brexit donor has lost the case again.'


 
What breach of EU law was he alleging

It states which ECHR article he was challenging - but ECHR is not the EU - a point repeatedly made by the EU and remain camps** but at no point does it state what EU regulation he was attempting to exploit.

Its almost as if someone has conflated ECHR with EU in order to generate a headline and dishonestly claim that a prominent Brexiter was sneakily using an EU law



**and possibly the Brexit camp as well - but generally their schimpfing about the EHCR is why the others so frequently point out it isn't the EU
 
Schadenfreude.

View attachment 461871

'Brexit bankroller Arron Banks has lost his latest attempt to avoid paying inheritance tax by using EU and human rights law. For a number of years, Banks has been contesting an outstanding inheritance tax bill of £162,945, levied on donations (amounting to £976,781) he made to UKIP.

'Banks argued that the tax claim was a breach of his human rights and a breach of EU law. Specifically, Banks argued that it breached Article 1 of the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that people have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, and for them not to be taken unjustly.

'Banks lost an appeal in November on this case, and lawyer Jolyon Maugham has today reported that the Brexit donor has lost the case again.'


Maybe he can claim the money back of the Brexit Party.....along with his excessive legal costs....or just suck it up like a bad loser.
 
What breach of EU law was he alleging

It states which ECHR article he was challenging - but ECHR is not the EU - a point repeatedly made by the EU and remain camps** but at no point does it state what EU regulation he was attempting to exploit.

Its almost as if someone has conflated ECHR with EU in order to generate a headline and dishonestly claim that a prominent Brexiter was sneakily using an EU law



**and possibly the Brexit camp as well - but generally their schimpfing about the EHCR is why the others so frequently point out it isn't the EU

Context and clarification.

'The Government plans to replace the Human Rights Act with a Bill of Rights, at some point.

The UK Human Rights Act (HRA) states that UK courts 'must take into account' (not necessarily follow) any judgment, decision, declaration or advisory opinion of the European Court of Human Rights

For more information on the uses of the HRA see our information on the human rights act

You can find summaries of Human Rights related court cases by going to the case law page on our website.

British Bill of Rights

As yet, we have no details about what this Bill will contain, but its aim is that rights should be set out by the UK parliament rather than Europe.

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decisions may still be relevant to our law but the British Bill of Rights will determine just how relevant they are.

It is also not clear how a British Bill of Rights would apply to Northern Ireland and Scotland.


 
Last edited:
'Context and clarification.

The Government plans to replace the Human Rights Act with a Bill of Rights, at some point.

The UK Human Rights Act (HRA) states that UK courts 'must take into account' (not necessarily follow) any judgment, decision, declaration or advisory opinion of the European Court of Human Rights

For more information on the uses of the HRA see our information on the human rights act

You can find summaries of Human Rights related court cases by going to the case law page on our website.

British Bill of Rights

As yet, we have no details about what this Bill will contain, but its aim is that rights should be set out by the UK parliament rather than Europe.

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decisions may still be relevant to our law but the British Bill of Rights will determine just how relevant they are.

It is also not clear how a British Bill of Rights would apply to Northern Ireland and Scotland.


Yep

But as I said hes citing the ECHR -
The claim is he tried to use EU law
The question I asked was what EU Law was he trying to use

Brexit is not synonymous with leaving the ECHR, we are not obliged to part company with that institution if we leave the EU - to the contrary theres been a concerted effort on both sides of the channel to keep the UK signed up.

So I will repeat the question its stated he appealed under the provision of the ECHR regarding huma rights - Its also being claimed he appealed using EU law and regulations - yet nobody has cited those - So ive asked which ones were they - or did he not and its nought but a smear campaign to insinuate duplicity and double standards by conflating the ECHR and the EU.

Not withstanding that I have no problem with the result and I think it was a) foolish to take it to the ECHR and b) I hope he has to pay all costs
 
Schadenfreude.

View attachment 461871

'Brexit bankroller Arron Banks has lost his latest attempt to avoid paying inheritance tax by using EU and human rights law. For a number of years, Banks has been contesting an outstanding inheritance tax bill of £162,945, levied on donations (amounting to £976,781) he made to UKIP.

'Banks argued that the tax claim was a breach of his human rights and a breach of EU law. Specifically, Banks argued that it breached Article 1 of the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that people have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, and for them not to be taken unjustly.

'Banks lost an appeal in November on this case, and lawyer Jolyon Maugham has today reported that the Brexit donor has lost the case again.'


For once I am rather chuffed-what a stupid position to take
 

New Posts

Top