Cheney v Conn
| Cheney v Conn (Inspector of Taxes) | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court (Chancery Division) |
| Full case name | Howard William Cheney v Conn (Inspector of Taxes) |
| Decided | 3 July 1967 |
| Citation(s) |
[1968] 1 WLR 242 [1968] 1 AII ER 779 |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Ungoed-Thomas J |
| Keywords | |
| Parliamentary supremacy | |
Cheney v Conn (Inspector of Taxes) [1968] 1 WLR 242, [1968] 1 All ER 779 was a decision of the English High Court.
Facts
A taxpayer, Howard Cheney, argued that the imposition of taxes under the Finance Act 1964 was unlawful as the taxes were used to fund nuclear weapons, which were banned by the Geneva Convention.[1]
Judgment
Ungoed-Thomas J dismissed the claim, holding:
| “ | If the purpose for which a statute may be used is an invalid purpose, then such remedy as there may be must be directed to dealing with that purpose and not to invalidating the statute itself. What the statute itself enacts cannot be unlawful, because what the statute says and provides is itself the law, and the highest form of law that is known to this country. It is the law which prevails over every other form of law, and it is not for the court to say that a parliamentary enactment, the highest law in this country, is illegal.[2] | ” |
Footnotes
- ↑ "Cheney v Conn [1968]". Webstroke Law. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
- ↑ ""Cheney v Conn (Inspector of Taxes) [1968] Chancery Division"". Sixth form law. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
This article is issued from
Wikipedia.
The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike.
Additional terms may apply for the media files.