On appeal from: [2010] EWCA Civ 95; [2010] EWCA Civ 83

Considered the interpretation of IR20, a booklet designed to provide guidance in relation to residence and ordinary residence of individuals, and whether the Court of Appeal had adopted the correct approach in determining if HMRC had changed its practice in relation to the application of IR20. The Supreme Court, by a 4-1 majority, dismissed the two appeals on the grounds that IR20 when read as a whole does not support the appellants’ contentions that they were to be treated as non-resident and not ordinarily resident in 2001-2002 as they had gone abroad for a settled purpose and had remained there for at least a whole tax year. It was also held that there was insufficient evidence that HMRC had departed from IR20 as a matter of settled practice.

For judgment, please download: [2011] UKSC 47
For the Court’s press summary, please download: Press Summary
For a non-PDF version of the judgment, please visit: BAILII