How many times has [1983] 2 AC 861 been cited?

[1983] 2 AC 861 is cited by 3 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[1983] 2 AC 861

· cited by 3 · influence score 14/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[1983] 2 AC 861

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 1Followed · 1Considered · 1

Followed — Stephen Hoey & Ors. v Commissioners for HMRC 2022-05-13
“…The leading modern cases on the application of the exclusively test are Mallalieu v Drummond (Inspector of Taxes) [1983] 2 AC 861 and MacKinlay (Inspector of Taxes) v Arthur Young McClelland Moores & Co [1990] 2 AC 239. From these cases the following propositions may be derived. (1) The w…”
Cited — Revenue And Customs v NCL Investments Ltd & Anor 2020-05-21
“…y and exclusively for the purposes of the taxpayers’ trades. Moreover, this was one of those obvious cases recognised by Lord Brightman in Mallalieu v Drummond [1983] 2 AC 861 which speaks for itself, in the absence of any other purpose not related to the taxpayers’ trades.…”
Considered — Revenue And Customs v Parry & Ors (Rev 1) 2018-10-16
“…The FTT had to find the primary facts and draw the inferences, having assessed the evidence in the round (see, generally, per Lord Brightman in Mallalieu v IRC [1983] 2 AC 861, 875). English law treats a person’s intention as as much a question of fact as the state of a person’s digestion. The FTT’s task was to consider whether Mrs S…”