§ Sir H. Butcherasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the case of Duple Motor Bodies Ltd. v. Ostime, one of Her Majesty's Inspectors of Taxes, in relation to the valuation of work in progress; whether he is aware that the judgments given in the Chancery Division, the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, were unanimously against the contentions of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue; and how much were the costs, including those of the company incurred by the Crown, in connection with this litigation.
§ The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Sir Edward Boyle)Yes, Sir. The Crown's costs, including those of the company, are expected to be in the region of £3,750.
§ Sir H. ButcherWhile thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him if he has seen the remarks of the Master of the Rolls, and what steps is he taking to ensure that public funds are not dissipated in the manner shown in this case?
§ Sir E. BoyleI do not agree that public funds were dissipated unreasonably in this case. An important general issue was involved and it has been of considerable value to have had a final decision on it.
§ Mr. MoreIn view of the fact that in this case judgment was given against the Crown, both in the Chancery Division and the Court of Appeal, without any dissenting judgment, can my hon. Friend say whether, before seeking leave to appeal to the House of Lords, an undertaking was given by the Crown to bear the costs, and, in any event, if this is not the usual practice, will my hon. Friend give instructions that this should be the usual practice?
§ Sir E. BoyleThat raises another matter. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising it, but I should prefer that he should give me notice of that question.