Being engaged in "remunerative work" and being "gainfully employed" are not necessarily the same.
For example, someone earning £2,000 per week, but only working 15 hours is not in remunerative work, but is certainly in gainful employment.
R(FC) 2/92 is relevant to the extent is shows that HMRC's view of someone's employment status is not necessarily binding on other bodies. A few months ago, a LA Appeals Officer mentioned to me this CD had been relied on at a FtT and it was not rejected by the Judge.
I readily agree with Claire that HMRC's view cannot be "ignored". But if other evidence points to a different conclusion, there is nothing wrong in deciding the latter evidence outweighs HMRC's view.
Incidentally (and completely unrelated to this thread), Ellis is a very strong case to rely on in alleged "working while claiming benefit" cases - particularly where the clmt maintains no profit was ever made.
|