Posted on the 12th October 2026 in PHTM News

ADDISON LEE FOUNDER SIR JOHN GRIFFIN LOSES £20.5 MILLION DOMICILE FIGHT WITH HMRC

The founder of London minicab giant Addison Lee has lost a major court battle against HMRC over a £20 million tax bill.

The case highlights the complicated - and often absurd - arguments created by Britain’s old non-domiciled ("non-dom") tax system, which the government finally scrapped in April 2025.

Sir John Griffin, who was born in England in 1942 and lived in the UK for over seven decades, claimed he should not pay £20.5 million in additional UK taxes accrued between 2013 and 2020.

He argued that he was officially domiciled in Ireland through his parents, meaning his foreign investments qualified for preferential tax treatment. HMRC challenged this interpretation, sparking a four-day tribunal that required top legal counsel on both sides.

Under historic legal principles dating back to the 19th century, a person's tax "domicile" depends heavily on family history and where an individual intends to live permanently.

To defeat Sir John's claim, tax authorities had to prove either that his father had permanently settled in England before Sir John turned 21, or that Sir John himself had chosen to live in England indefinitely.

The tribunal sifted through decades of family history - including Sir John's London roots, his Arsenal season ticket, his English golf club memberships, and his father's move to London in the 1930s.

Ultimately, the First-tier Tribunal ruled in favour of HMRC. Judge Michaela Snelders determined that Sir John's father had likely acquired an English domicile by 1959, which meant Sir John automatically inherited it. The judge added that Sir John - who built his business in London, bought property in the capital, and spent almost his entire life in the UK - had clearly chosen England as his permanent home.

While Sir John retains the right to appeal, the lengthy tribunal underscores why critics long pushed to abolish non-dom status. For decades, the lack of clear statutory laws left courts bogged down in subjective debates over personal intentions and ancestral ties - all while allowing wealthy individuals to keep substantial investments outside the UK tax system.


Read another story