Oliver Isaac Iny v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 30 September 2010
Neutral citation: Neutral citation not available
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: medium
This appeal concerned a 10 October 1994 sale by Oliver Iny of all shares in Castlegold to Harlequin for £20,000 and whether that disposal was at arm's length for s 17 TCGA purposes. The tribunal found the sale was not at arm's length and therefore s 17 applied, and it provisionally assessed Castlegold's net asset (market) value at £2,129,526 on that date for tax assessment, leaving minor adjustments and any continuation open.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
The tribunal applied the principle that a transfer lacking genuine negotiation, supported by token consideration and a cosmetic price‑adjustment clause may be treated as not at arm's length under s 17, and that market value should be estimated by reference to a prudent hypothetical willing buyer/seller (using quoted share prices where appropriate and adjusting for contingent rights and known liabilities).
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The tribunal observed that opaque familial/trust structures can make establishing statutory "connection" difficult, and that failure to produce available documents may support circumstantial inference of a close relationship; it also noted that price‑adjustment clauses framed to give the appearance of valuation rather than effecting a genuine adjustment are indicative of non‑arm's‑length bargaining.