HC Deb 09 July 1896 vol 42 cc1181-3

"There shall be added to Sub-section 5 of Section 10 of the principal Act the following proviso: 'Provided that in every such case any party shall have a right of appeal to Her Majesty's Court of Appeal.'"

The hon. and learned Gentleman stated that the clause was merely intended to repair an omission in the Finance Act of 1894. An appeal from the County Court was allowed by the Act in cases where the property in question exceeded £10,000; but very often important points were raised, though the property involved was small in amount, and so it was thought right to allow an appeal in every case.

MR. SAMUEL EVANS (Glamorgan, Mid)

said the clause would give for the first time an appeal from the County Court direct to Her Majesty's Court of Appeal. Every appeal at present was an appeal to the Divisional Court, and he did not think there ought to be an alteration in the procedure.


said that having regard to the points raised, and in order to save expense; it was thought better to allow the appeal direct to the Court of Appeal; a course for which there were precedents in other cases.


said that an appeal was allowed by Section 10, Sub-section 5 of the principal Act, to the County Court in all cases where the property was under £10,000, whatever the question might be, so long as it was one of those set forth in Section 10, Sub-section 1. But he was informed that the Inland Revenue had refused to appear in the County Court in cases where the dispute turned on any other point than on the value of the property. If that were so, the object of the appeal to the County Court—which was introduced on the Motion of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, for the purpose of economy—was defeated.


said it was true that the Inland Revenue had so acted; but he would undertake that the Commissioners would put a more liberal construction on the sub-section in future.


asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to accept an Amendment that he had lower down on the Paper to remedy the complaint to which he had alluded. If he left the sub-section as it was, the practice might remain as it was, for the construction put on the clause of the principal Act by the Inland Revenue, was probably inspired by the Law Officers of the Crown.


opposed the clause.


said they were now about to give the right of appeal direct from the County Court to the Court of Appeal. There was no provision for the hearing of additional evidence, and upon the ground that the clause was crudely drawn he should oppose the clause.

Clause read the First and Second time, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.

MR. CHARLES McLAREN (Leicester, Bosworth) moved to report progress. The Government had obtained the whole of the Bill except the schedules; and in the interest of the Government, as well as in that of the House he suggested that the time had now arrived to bring the sitting to a close. A number of new clauses standing in the names of private Members, raising highly contentious subjects of discussion, waited to be taken, but if the Committee embarked on the discussion of them it was certain to last for three or four hours.


hoped that the Committee, having got so far, would finish the Bill. [Cheers.] The clauses which, perhaps, might excite most opposition were not to be moved, and the others remaining to be adopted were what might be described as purely machinery clauses.


thought, after what had been said by the right hon. Gentleman, that the Committee might now dispose of the Bill—[cheers]—especially as one of the clauses in the name of the hon. Member for York was not to be moved.

Motion to report Progress, by leave, withdrawn.

*MR. GIBSON BOWLES moved the following new Clause:—