CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936 — Page 104

120

if a claim for Eatste Duty hes s risen on the ceaser of the

said annuity on the death of Lady Chater, then the capital

sum necessary to produe 210,000 per aunum, caloulated at the

rate of 8 por centum per annum (being the Court rate of

interest) amounts to £125,000, which sum converted into hong

Kong dollars at the rate of 1/11 (being the rate prevailing

on the date of Lady Chater's death) amounts to $1,263,157.90

(Vide paragraph 8 of the above mentioned affidavit and the

Commissioner's letter of 20th May, 1935, to the solicitors

for the Trustees).

On this sum of $1,263,157.30 estate duty and interest

was prid by the frustees on the 23rd May, 1935, and the

Trustees intimated their intention of appealing against the

decision of the Commissiouer «

In accordance with the procedure laid down in th

rules onde on the 9th August, 1927, under the Batate Duty

Ordixone e, 1915 the effectiveness of which is preserved by

section 11(2) of the Interpretation Ordinance, No. 31 of 1911.

the Trustees filed on the 27th May, 1935, a Statement of

Grounds of Appeal.

On the 7th June, 1935, the Commissioner filed notice

of his determination to maintain in the whole the decision

appealed against, sm on the same day the Trustees filed

the requisite fetition to the Supreme Court.

The contentions of the Trustees as set forth in the

Statement of rounds of appeal and Petition are

(1) That by virtue of section 25 of Ordinence No. 3 of 1932

(the Estate Duty Ordinence, 1932) no estate duty was then

payable (1.e. payable on the death of Lady Chater).

(2) That if estate duty were payable by reason of the

5.