In a landmark 326 page judgment in what has been recognised as one of the most complex and high value (£1.4 bn) set of proceedings to come before the Commercial Court, Mr Justice Andrew Baker dismissed the claims by the Danish Tax Authority in respect of what it claimed was a fraud perpetrated against it via a cum-ex trading model used by defendants around the world.
Its claims against Hugh’s client, an introductory broker based in London, which were in deceit, knowing assistance, conspiracy to injure by unlawful means and unjust enrichment were all dismissed.
The judgment can be read here: SKAT v Solo Capital Partners LLP [2025] EWHC 2364 (Comm)
In his judgment, crediting Hugh with what was the work of both himself and those instructing him, the Judge noted:
I agree with Mr Jory KC’s submission, developed persuasively in his careful written closing, that SKAT’s case against Mr Devonshire of relevant knowledge or understanding such as might have resulted in some liability, if the deceit SKAT alleged had been practised upon it, depended entirely on “so-called inferences that … are in fact invitations to jump to conclusions … in a context of making findings of dishonesty where the burden of proof which SKAT has to discharge requires compelling evidence.” SKAT’s case against Mr Devonshire, in my view, was an attempt to make bricks without even the seeds that might be planted to grow crops to provide the straw.
Hugh was instructed by Richard Marshall, Oliver Cooke and Charlotte Allan of Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP.
