Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
I shall leave the ad hom to you and instead deal with the arguments, not the person, although I am naturally flattered by your obsession with me.
If the lawyers had not argued the case, the parents would have argued it themselves, and the case would have taken longer and cost more. I see lots of litigants in person in the courts. They do not make things quicker and cheaper. These were angry parents, ranting at doctors and the Judge. They would have ranted on and on . The lawyers possibly acted as a brake on the craziness.
What was the system to do? Start care proceedings and remove the parents from the decision making? That would have taken months of legal process as well. GOSH could not just ride roughshod over the opposition of the parents, flawed as that was. The process had to take its course.
Thank you for a sensible answer. It's a good point and one I had not considered.If the lawyers had not argued the case, the parents would have argued it themselves, and the case would have taken longer and cost more. I see lots of litigants in person in the courts. They do not make things quicker and cheaper. These were angry parents, ranting at doctors and the Judge. They would have ranted on and on . The lawyers possibly acted as a brake on the craziness.
What was the system to do? Start care proceedings and remove the parents from the decision making? That would have taken months of legal process as well. GOSH could not just ride roughshod over the opposition of the parents, flawed as that was. The process had to take its course.
Breadvan72 said:
Perhaps you could inform yourself about the world by reading the FT and the Economist - both very good reads. Lawyers are basically paid in cash. They are highly visible to HMRC and cannot often defer tax or hide income without getting into trouble. Many modern investment and corporate finance outfits operate on the basis that income may be off-shored, or taken as dividends, and thus individuals who have very high incomes may pay rather less tax than doctors, architects, lawyers and so on.
I suspect 25 odd years in senior roles within the FS sector gives me a better understanding of how things work than reading the FT and the Economist.Some of my work has also covered the taxation of complex cross border operations. So I am more than familiar with the rules on the allocation of income and expenses into different jurisdictions. The concepts are not that complex but can be difficult to apply. As for personal tax most of the advantage of dividends has now disappeared. Clearly some very wealth pay little tax, the non doms, but they cannot work in the UK.
The fact is HMRC have enormous powers and avoiding tax is just not worth it. However, its perfectly legal to organise your affairs to minimise tax. Obviously keeping in mind the Ramsay principal.
Sorry if this is off topic.
Edited by Mrr T on Wednesday 2nd August 13:36
Rovinghawk said:
Breadvan72 said:
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant.
Inter arma enim silent leges? Is that also Tacitus?Cicero's line was beautifully riffed on and countered by the great Lord Atkin in his dissenting speech in WW2 emergency powers case Liversidge v Anderton.
"In this Country, amidst the clash of arms, the law is not silent. It speaks the same language in war as in peace."
Lord Atkin's name lives on - the majority Law Lords who upheld Government power and trashed civil liberties are mostly forgotten
TwigtheWonderkid said:
There was a law student named Rex
Who had very small organs of sex
When charged with exposure
He replied with composure
"De minimis non curat lex"
Some girls from the Isles of the ScilliesWho had very small organs of sex
When charged with exposure
He replied with composure
"De minimis non curat lex"
Cut up "The Times" for their frillies
This prompted the banter
Tempora mutantur
Et nos mutamur in illis.
Breadvan72 said:
Cicero. A self serving comment given his breaches of the laws of the Roman Republic when as Consul he crushed the Catiline Conspiracy.
Cicero's line was beautifully riffed on and countered by the great Lord Atkin in his dissenting speech in WW2 emergency powers case Liversidge v Anderton.
"In this Country, amidst the clash of arms, the law is not silent. It speaks the same language in war as in peace."
Lord Atkin's name lives on - the majority Law Lords who upheld Government power and trashed civil liberties are mostly forgotten
Although, ironically, in one of the most purple of purple prose from the 20th century, John Kennedy, when conferring honorary US citizenship on Winston Churchill, saidCicero's line was beautifully riffed on and countered by the great Lord Atkin in his dissenting speech in WW2 emergency powers case Liversidge v Anderton.
"In this Country, amidst the clash of arms, the law is not silent. It speaks the same language in war as in peace."
Lord Atkin's name lives on - the majority Law Lords who upheld Government power and trashed civil liberties are mostly forgotten
".... given unlimited powers by his citizens, he was ever vigilant to protect their rights...."
Anonymous story from one of the team looking after Charlie:
Charlie Gard medic decries 'soap opera' that stoked abuse of hospital
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/04/ch...
Charlie Gard medic decries 'soap opera' that stoked abuse of hospital
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/04/ch...
hstewie said:Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff