The agreement between HMRC and Goldman Sachs reached in 2010 could be quashed after the high court allowed a preliminary permission hearing to take place on 13 June following court filings made by the activist group UK Uncut Legal Action.I'm not sure how they are doing that--no sovereign immunity? Is there taxpayer standing? This is not an area I know anything about. But I don't think the US Uncut group could similarly sue the IRS if it found out they did something similar. The Guardian links to the UKUncut Legal Action Group's website, where they are asking for donations to support the cause. What I would like to see is the court filings and briefs/factum if any, but I don't see much useful on the site. It says:
"It’s alleged that David Hartnett, the government’s top tax man, who loves to be wined and dined, met Goldman Sachs’ top brass in late 2010 and with a handshake agreed that the bank would be let off paying £10 million owed to the public purse in interest on an unpaid tax bill.
To challenge this back room deal, UK Uncut Legal Action, with the help of law firm Leigh Day & Co, is threatening legal action against the HMRC unless this dodgy and unfair decision is quashed."Then at a tab called "quids in" it says further that "We are taking HMRC to court because we believe that their secret deal was unlawful. HMRC and Goldman Sachs can afford the best lawyers in town, so we need your help to take them on. It’s the people’s court case."
If anyone understands the legal structure under which they can sue, can you fill me in?