Resources

When Tax Schemes Go Sour

Podcasts
13 July 2022

In this podcast episode, barristers Paul Mitchell KC and Ben Smiley focus on the position of professionals who recommend tax avoidance or mitigation schemes or who adapt the contractual documentation necessary to give effect to these schemes. They will also be touching on a very recent claim against the architect of one such scheme, a tax Silk.

  • Subscribe to our podcast:

This episode looks at the factors that determine what a court will find was the role of the professional advisor in tax schemes and, in particular, what advisory obligations they might have had to their clients.

It is worth reminding ourselves that all claims like this are effectively negligent misrepresentation claims; the claimant is alleging that, as a result of things said by the professional, he or she took a step which resulted in loss.  So what the court is ultimately seeking to understand is:

1) What can one say the claimant actually believed was the position having regard to the advice given by the professionals?

2) Did the claimant take the step that caused loss as a result of the state of mind created by the professionals’ advice?

3) Did the professional advice cover all those factors that the court considers ought reasonably to have been covered having regard to: firstly, the nature of the transaction proposed; and secondly, the particular attributes of the claimant?

Ben looks at the impact of the material that shows what the professional represented to the claimant about the work he or she would be undertaking.  He will discuss the actual wording of the retainer, including the exclusion clause and any disclaimer, before analysing a recent good illustration in Knights v Townsend Harrison. Ben will also consider the lessons to be taken from the very recent decision of Mr Justice Zacaroli in Thornhill.

Paul’s section explores the forensic tools the court can use to discern what advice the professional might be expected to give the claimant having regard to, or perhaps despite, the terms of the retainer and having regard to the attributes of the claimant.

Notes

Click here to download the When Tax Schemes go Sour Handout.

Related areas

Speakers

Paul Mitchell KC

Call: 1999 Silk: 2016

Ben Smiley

Call: 2009

Search

Expertise

Related resources

New Representative Actions: Litigation Funding, Costs, and Court Decisions


4 New Square Chambers’ George McDonald and Matt Waszak explore new representative…

Discover more

Claims in the CAT: An Analysis of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) and Key Cost-related Issues


In this latest episode in our costs and litigation funding mini-series, 4…

Discover more

Security for Costs


In this episode of our costs and litigation funding mini-series, Roger Mallalieu…

Discover more

If you would like to know more or have a question please talk to our clerks

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)