HC Deb 01 July 1913 vol 54 cc1674-5
31. Sir GEORGE YOUNGER

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the case of Herbert's Trustees versus The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, generally known as the minus values case, recently decided in favour of the Crown by the House of Lords, having regard to the importance of the case, to the difficulty in interpreting the Statute, and to the fact that it was carried to the House of Lords by the Crown after a unanimous decision of the Scottish Valuation Court in favour of the appellant, the Treasury will pay the appellant's costs?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I regret that do not see my way to accede to the hon. Baronet's suggestion.

Sir G. YOUNGER

Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the unanimous decision of the Valuation Court in Scotland, consisting of three judges, was against the Crown, subject, of course, to the appeal to the House of Lords, owing to the ambiguity of the Act, and does he not think that this expenditure ought to be defrayed by the Crown?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

The Crown are simply following the usual practice. I think it would be a very serious thing if in every case in which the Crown won the costs should be paid by the Crown owing to the ambiguity of the law.

Sir G. YOUNGER

In view of the unsatisfactory answer, I beg to give notice that I will raise this question on the adjournment to-night.