He lived in England for 40 years
Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 10:00 am
Case Law
IRC v Bullock: Mr Bullock had a domicile of origin in Nova Scotia. His wife did not want to live in Nova Scotia. Mr Bullock hoped to return there should he persuade his wife to change her mind or should he survive her.
It was held by the Courts that he had a real determination to return rather than a vague latvia mobile database aspiration. Accordingly he retained his Nova Scotian domicile of origin and had not acquired an English domicile of choice.
In contrast:
Furse v IRC: Mr Furse expressed a wish to live in England for the rest of his life save only for a contingency that he would return to the USA, should he cease to be physically able to take an active interest in his farm (situated in England).
The Courts decided that this intention was so vague as to impose no limit on his intention to remain in England. Accordingly he had acquired an English domicile of choice.
IRC v Bullock: Mr Bullock had a domicile of origin in Nova Scotia. His wife did not want to live in Nova Scotia. Mr Bullock hoped to return there should he persuade his wife to change her mind or should he survive her.
It was held by the Courts that he had a real determination to return rather than a vague latvia mobile database aspiration. Accordingly he retained his Nova Scotian domicile of origin and had not acquired an English domicile of choice.
In contrast:
Furse v IRC: Mr Furse expressed a wish to live in England for the rest of his life save only for a contingency that he would return to the USA, should he cease to be physically able to take an active interest in his farm (situated in England).
The Courts decided that this intention was so vague as to impose no limit on his intention to remain in England. Accordingly he had acquired an English domicile of choice.