Exchequer Chambers

• Call date: 1969, Middle Temple
• QC date: 1985

• Email:

  andrew.thornhillqc@exchequerchambers.com

Andrew Thornhill KC

Andrew Thornhill QC has extensive experience across the full range of tax law, with special emphasis on employee benefit trusts, employee remuneration, share schemes, inheritance tax/capital gains tax planning and litigation.

Career

Called: 1969, Middle Temple

Pump Court Tax Chambers: 1969 to 2020

Exchequer Chambers: 2020 to date

QC: 1985

Formerly recorder Western Circuit

Recent cases

John Mander Pension Trustees Limited v HMRC (Supreme Court)

RFC 2012 plc (in liquidation) (formerly The Rangers Football Club plc) v Advocate General for Scotland (Supreme Court)

Clavis Liberty Fund 1 LP v HMRC (First-tier Tribunal)

Scotts Atlantic v HMRC (Upper Tribunal)

Laird v CIR (House of Lords)

Eversden v CIR (Court of Appeal)

Dextra Accessories v MacDonald (Court of Appeal)

Optos (Special Commissioners)

Publications

Potter & Monroe’s Tax Planning with Precedents, 4th – 7th Editions

Passing Down the Family Business/the Family Farm

Contributor to Gore-Brown on Companies and Kerr on Receivers

Memberships 

Revenue Bar Association 

S.T.E.P. 

London Common Law & Commercial Bar Association 

Education 

Clifton College 

Corpus Christi College, Oxford 

The Chambers Guide says… 

Corporate Tax 
Ranking: Band 3 

"Best known for his particular expertise in employee benefit trusts and disguised remuneration matters. He also advises on corporate reorganisations and the use of offshore structures to hold UK property assets. Thornhill has additional knowledge relating to tax schemes, capital gains tax and Advanced Payment Notices. He's a go-to member of the Bar particularly in relation to the tax implications of employment structures." (2020) 

"His technical knowledge and breadth of experience is matched only by his commercial awareness." "Very user-friendly. He's got a very in-depth knowledge of his subject and is very creative." (2019) 

"...  Extremely clever. He has a huge knowledge of tax and is very quick at grasping issues and coming up with commercial suggestions for resolving issues." "He has an incredible depth of knowledge." (2018) 

The Legal 500 says... 

Tax: Corporate and VAT 
Ranking: Corporate Tax: Leading Silk (2015) 

"Hugely creative and fearless, a real lateral thinker." (2015) 

"An excellent advocate with an in-depth understanding of the subject matter." (2014) 

Private Client: Personal Tax 
Ranking: Leading Silk (2015) 

"Immensely charismatic." (2015) 

"Without doubt one of the most learned and experienced tax counsel in the UK." (2014) 

Regulatory information

Andrew Thornhill QC is an independent self-employed barrister registered with the Bar Standards Board of England (ref. no 33858); whose practice is governed by the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales which code can be found at www.barstandardsboard.org.uk; has full professional liability insurance provided by the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited (ref BM 2930/078) (details of the worldwide cover are provided at www.barmutual.co.uk); is registered for VAT (reg. no. 244178559); and can be contacted during chambers opening hours by telephone at 020 3150 0001 or by e-mail at clerks@exchequerchambers.com

Please see the Terms of Engagement page for instructing us.

Instructing Andrew: Conduct of Litigation

Andrew is instructed in the usual way by solicitors and accountants.

Fees

Details regarding our approach to fees can be found here. Please see our Terms & Conditions for further information.

Privacy policy

Andrew is registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as a Data Controller for the personal data that he holds and processes as a barrister. His registered address is that of his Chambers and his registration number is Z4755568. The Privacy Policy can be found here.

• Email:

  richard.claytonqc@exchequerchambers.com

Richard Clayton KC

“He’s willing to listen, tactically astute, knows a lot about core procedure and is good at identifying the key issues of a case.” 
Chambers and Partners – 2020 (Civil Liberties and Human Rights) 

“A very knowledgeable silk.” 
Legal 500 – 2020 (Civil Liberties and Human Rights) 

“Regularly instructed in Privy Council.” 
Legal 500 – 2020 (Administrative and public law) 

“He is very intellectually able.” 
Chambers and Partners 

“He is a pleasure to work with and has an instinctive grasp of what the courts will think.” 
Chambers and Partners 

Practice areas 

Richard is a commercial litigator/arbitrator and undertakes a wide range of advisory and litigation work (both for and against public bodies) covering tax, community care, data protection, discrimination, environmental, healthcare, human rights, local government (e.g. vires and powers, constitutional issues and governance, elections, finance), public procurement, Privy Council, international work (particularly constitutional work), police actions, tax and regulatory/disciplinary work. 

He has extensive experience in conducting Supreme Court and Privy Council appeals.  Lord Wilson in Mohammed v Public Service Commission of Trinidad [2017] UKPC 31 said, “Mr Clayton QC with the charm and skill which is characteristic of him.” Chambers Directory 2019 describes Richard as “one of the finest minds at the Bar… an intellectual giant who is an asset to the Bar” and in 2018 said he was “very sharp when it comes to tactics. He is very good at guiding you on what the judge is likely to be thinking, his “command of the subject is almost second to none. He’s thoughtful, approachable, and very client-focused”, “affable and has a mature approach” “calm, reliable and consistent” and “has a very wide knowledge of the law.” 

Commercial  

Richard has experience of all types of complex commercial disputes.  He has particular expertise in contractual issues which arise in the public sector including public procurement. Richard works with Chambers’ juniors across the ambit of commercial / chancery litigation, undertakes emergency injunction work such as freezing and seizure orders as well as arbitrations.  He acts in cases concerning commercial contracts, civil fraud, breaches of directors’ duties, insolvency, restitution, shareholders’ rights, issues of statutory or contractual construction and public international law. 

Current cases include representing a claimant in a $US 150 m arbitration arising from Qatar, acting as an arbitrator in a commercial dispute between a local authority and a private sector care provider, advising in relation to a £7m claim against two banks alleged to be jointly liable with financial advisors for fraud, advising various local authorities in relation to procurement issues and an allegedly unlawful cartel arrangements concerning several construction contracts in Trinidad representing a former Minister. 

Public law and regulatory 

Richard undertakes a wide range of advisory and litigation work (both for and against public bodies) covering tax, community care, data protection, discrimination,  environmental, healthcare, human rights, local government (e.g. vires and powers, constitutional issues and governance, elections, finance), public procurement, international work (particularly constitutional work) and regulatory/disciplinary work. 

Administrative and Public Law

What Chambers and Partners say: 

“He is very, very clever.” 
“He is affable and has a mature approach.” “Calm, reliable and consistent.” “He has a very wide knowledge of the law.” 
“A well-respected public lawyer, who is a very vigorous and forceful opponent.” 
Praised for his preparation and his ability to manage difficult situations: “Brilliant on his feet.” “Very likeable and imaginative.”
He is particularly recommended for thinking laterally on cases: “He’s the sort of guy you’d ring up to find a new point in a case.” 

Recent public law cases of note include: 

Southwark LBC v Ludgate House (2020) (CA - whether “guardianship schemes” exempt from business rates) 

Hollandwest v  HMRC (2019) (injunctions granted to preserve right of access to Court awaiting FTT hearings for wholesalers seeking HMRC approval under s 88C Alcoholic Liquor Duties Act 1979 so as to clarify Supreme Court decision, OWD ltd v HMRC) 

Jones v Teaching Regulation Authority (2019) (whether Secretary of State had power to supplement his statutory procedures by using common law power) 

R (British Homeopathy Association) v National Health Service England (2018) (consultation challenge to terminating homeopathy treatment)

R (Page) v Darlington Borough Council (2018) (closure of library services)

R (South Yorkshire County Council) v Sheffield Combined Authority (2017) (local government reorganisation) 

R (Watch Tower) v Charity Commission (2016) Court of Appeal (judicial review and alternative remedy)

R (English Bridge Union) v Sports England (2015) (whether Sports England acted unlawfully in refusing to recognise bridge as a sport)

R (Hall) v Leicestershire County Council (2015) (museum closure consultation)

Kennedy v Charity Commission (2015) (Supreme Court- Freedom of Information, Article 10 and common law rights)

R (T) v Trafford MBC (2015) (consultation challenge to local authority cuts)

Human rights

What Chambers and Partners say: 

“He’s an encyclopaedia of human rights law. His strength is his knowledge.” 
“Richard is a go-to silk for human rights issues, he is a pleasure to work with and has an instinctive grasp of what the courts will think.” 
“He’s very proactive. He’ll think around his cases and come up with creative ideas”, “incredibly bright” and has “fantastic academic ability.” 
“Clients highlight the confidence they have when instructing him. He undertakes a balance of work for both claimants and defendants, and has appeared in the Caribbean, Hong Kong and the Privy Council, as well as in numerous matters in the domestic court.” 

Recent human rights and civil liberties cases of note include: 

Hollandwest v  HMRC (2019) injunctions granted to preserve right of access to Court under awaiting FTT hearings for wholesalers seeking HMRC approval under s 88C Alcoholic Liquor Duties Act 1979 so as to clarify Supreme Court decision, OWD Ltd v HMRC) 

Maharaj v Petroliam Company of Trinidad (2019) (freedom of information - Privy Council) 

A-G of Trinidad v Maharaj (2018) (judicial appointments of Supreme Court judges - Privy Council)

Seepersad v Ayers-Ceasar (2018) (interim constitutional remedies - Privy Council)

Central Broadcasting Services v A-G of Trinidad (2018) (damages for breach of freedom of expression - Privy Council)

Mohammed v Public Service Commission of Trinidad (2017) (separation of powers - Privy Council)

Tayo v Charity Commission (2017) (discrimination)

Magyar Helsinki v Hungary (2016) (Art 10 and right of access to official information before Grand Chamber of European Court of Human Rights)

Kennedy v Charity Commission (2015) (Supreme Court- Freedom of Information, Art 10 and common law rights)

Local Government

What Chambers and Partners say: 

Particularly instructed for vires and procurement law matters: a “delightful and talented advocate.” 
A “razor-sharp mind” and an “extremely accessible manner, he is never short of work.” 
He has a huge fan base of local authorities happy to sing his praises. “He is extremely bright and very creative in finding workable solutions to tricky problems.” 

Offshore and international 

Richard undertakes public and constitutional law, both in the Privy Council and internationally.  He sits as a Deputy High Court judge and as an international arbitrator. He undertakes work in the Caribbean (Anguilla, Belize, Cayman, St Vincent, Trinidad, Turks & Caicos), Canada, US, Channel Islands, Gibraltar, Hong Kong and Isle of Man. 

Richard is instructed in many high profile cases in Trinidad. He is currently instructed to defend a senator defamation proceeding brought by the Prime Minister and is acting in the allegedly unlawful cartel arrangement concerning several construction contracts on behalf of a former Minister. 

Richard was the United Kingdom representative to Venice Commission (Council of Europe’s advisory body on constitutional law) from 2011 to 2019, a member of its Executive and Chair of its Sub-Commission on Working Methods. He worked as a Rapporteur in Opinions concerning conscription and freedom of thought (Armenia), freedom of assembly (Russia), freedom of expression and defamation (Azerbaijan) (Italy) and judicial independence and mediation (Tajikistan), freedom of association and NGOs (Azerbaijan), (Hungary) and Romania and the rule of law crisis in Poland Malta and Slovakia. 

Recent cases include:

Garcia v Commissioners of Inquiry (2020) (Trinidad judicial review of Commissioners of inquiry into Las Alturas Towers) 

Maharaj v Petrotrin Company of Trinidad (2019) (freedom of information- Privy Council) 

Commissioner of Police for Trinidad v Singh (2019) (discrimination- Privy Council) 

Garcia v Commissioners of Inquiry (2020) (Trinidad judicial review of Commissioners of inquiry into Las Alturas Towers) 

Gopeesingh v Al Rawi (2019) (Trinidad CA- election bias application against Chief Justice)  

Hart v Commissioners of Inquiry (2018) (Trinidad judicial review of Commissioners of inquiry into Las Alturas Towers) 

A-G of Trinidad v Maharaj (2018) (judicial appointments of Supreme Court judges - Privy Council)

Seepersad v Ayers-Ceasar (2018) (interim constitutional remedies)

Central Broadcasting Services v A-G of Trinidad (2018) (damages for breach of freedom of expression - Privy Council)

Mohammed v Public Service Commission of Trinidad (2017) (separation of powers - Privy Council)

R v Misick (2014) (8-day hearing before CA in Turks and Caicos)

Richard’s Privy Council cases also include: 

Surratt v A-G of Trinidad (No 2) (2009) (damages for breaching constitutional right to protection of the law)

Panday v Virgil (2008) (representing former Prime Minister of Trinidad in abuse of process complaint following successful bias appeal before Trinidad Court of Appeal)

Suratt v A-G of Trinidad (2008) (anti-discrimination legislation constitutional, reversing Trinidad CA)

Toussaint v A-G of St Vincent (2007) (right of access to the court and parliamentary privilege)

BACONGO v Department of Environment No 2 (2004) (adequacy of environmental impact assessment)

BACONGO v Department of Environment (2003) (jurisdiction of PC to grant interim injunction in pending appeal)

Richard’s cases before the European Court of Human Rights include: 

Kennedy v United Kingdom (2017) (freedom of expression and freedom of information)

Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v Hungary (2017) (Grand Chamber - freedom of expression and freedom of information)

S v United Kingdom (2009) (Grand Chamber - retention of DNA for individuals arrested but not charged breached Article 8, reversing House of Lords in Marper, 2004)

Liberty v United Kingdom (2009) (statutory scheme authorising telephone interception to and from UK breached Article 8)

Supreme Court, House of Lords and Privy Council Appeals:

AG Anguilla v Estate of Dame Bernice Lake (2020) (PC) (representing AG appealing compulsory purchase compensation award) 

Seepersad v Ayers-Ceasar (2020) (PC) (whether detaining juveniles in adult prison breaches constitutional rights) 

Maharaj v Petroleum Company of Trinidad (2019) (PC) (freedom of information) 

Commissioner of Police for Trinidad v Singh (2019) (PC) (discrimination) 

A-G of Trinidad v Petrotrin (2019) (PC) (freedom of information) 

The Commissioner of Police for Trinidad v Singh (2019) (discrimination) 

A-G of Trinidad v Maharaj (2018) (PC) (judicial appointments of Supreme Court judges); 

Seepersad v Ayers-Ceasar (2018) (PC) (interim constitutional remedies)

Central Broadcasting Services v A-G of Trinidad (2018) (PC) (damages for breach of freedom of expression)

Mohammed v Public Service Commission of Trinidad (2017) (PC) (separation of powers)

Kennedy v Charity Commission (2014) (SC) (Freedom of Information, Art 10 and common law rights)

Suratt v A-G of Trinidad (No 2) (2009) PC) (damages for breaching constitutional right to protection of the law)

Panday v Virgil (2008) (PC) (representing former Prime Minister of Trinidad in abuse of process complaint following successful bias appeal before Trinidad Court of Appeal)

Suratt v A-G of Trinidad (2008) (PC) (anti-discrimination legislation constitutional, reversing Trinidad CA)

R (Huang) v SSHD (2007) (HL) (important case on proportionality principles)

Toussaint v A-G of St Vincent (2007) (PC) (right of access to the court and parliamentary privilege)

R (Greenfield) v SSHD (2005) (HL) (Human Rights Act damages)

R (Smith) v Parole Board (2005) (HL) (common law fairness, not Articles 5 and 6 ECHR requires oral hearing)

BACONGO v Department of Environment No 2 (2004) (PC) (adequacy of environmental impact assessment)

BACONGO v Department of Environment (2003) (PC) (jurisdiction of PC to grant interim injunction in pending appeal)

A-G v Blake (2001) (HL) (confiscation of advance of royalties on autobiography- common law human rights, restitutionary damages, account); 

R v Chief Constable West Midlands Police (1994) (HL) (public interest immunity) 

Appointments 

Deputy High Court Judge (2012) 

United Kingdom’s representative to Venice Commission (Council of Europe’s advisory body on constitutional law) (2011- 2019); Member of Executive and Chairman of Working Methods Sub-Commission

Recorder (Crown Court) (2006) 

Bencher, Middle Temple (2009)

Visiting Professor, University College, London (2015-2020) 

Supreme Court User Group since 2009

Chairman, Constitutional and Administrative Bar Association (2008-2010)

Associate Fellow, Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge since 2001

Chairman, Bar Council Committee on Civil Legal Aid 2005-2012

Vice Chairman Bar Council Remuneration Committee 2006-2008

Bar Council Remuneration Committee 2005 to 2010

Bar Council Public Affairs Committee 2006-2007

Bar Council International Affairs Committee 2008-2010

Bar Council 2004-2007

Publications 

Joint author with Hugh Tomlinson QC: 

The Law of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 3rd edn, forthcoming) - the standard practitioner textbook cited in House of Lords, Privy Council and Supreme Court over 45 times.

Civil Actions against the Police (4th edn, Sweet & Maxwell forthcoming).

The Law of the European Convention on Human Rights: A Practitioner Text (with Sir Nicholas Brazta, former President of the European Court of Human Rights (OUP, forthcoming).

Judicial Review Procedure (2nd edn, Hart Publishing 1997).

Police Actions (2nd edn, Hart Publishing 1997). 

Author: 

Why Rights Matter (Oxford University Press, forthcoming).

Practice and Procedure at Industrial Tribunals (Legal Action, 1988). 

Regulatory information

Richard Clayton QC is an independent self-employed barrister registered with the Bar Standards Board of England (ref. no 33858); whose practice is governed by the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales which code can be found at www.barstandardsboard.org.uk; has full professional liability insurance provided by the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited (ref BM 2930/078) (details of the worldwide cover are provided at www.barmutual.co.uk); is registered for VAT (reg. no. 397004445); and can be contacted during chambers opening hours by telephone at 020 3150 0001 or by e-mail at clerks@exchequerchambers.com

Please see the Terms of Engagement page for instructing us.

Instructing Richard: Conduct of Litigation

Richard is instructed in the usual way by solicitors and accountants, and those authorised to instruct members of the Bar on the basis of licensed access.

Fees

Details regarding our approach to fees can be found here. Please see our Terms & Conditions for further information.

Privacy policy

Richard is registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as a Data Controller for the personal data that he holds and processes as a barrister. His registered address is that of his Chambers and his registration number is ZA106386. The Privacy Policy can be found here.

• Call date: 1995

• Email:

  julian.hickey@exchequerchambers.com

Julian was called to the Bar in 1995 and he has been a partner with major City and West End solicitors’ practices. During the course of Julian’s practice in tax (advisory, enquiries and disputes work) he has developed a wide-ranging knowledge of company, partnership, intellectual property, trusts and insolvency law. This enables him to advise clients with a good appreciation of the wider issues relevant to them.  He has a Ph.D in tax (awarded by the University of London); and he has written and lectured extensively on tax issues.

He acts as an advocate and in an advisory capacity and has appeared both on his own and as part of a team in a wide variety of cases in the tax tribunals and higher courts.  For further details also see www.taxbarrister.com

Tax disputes
Julian accepts instructions in all areas of tax practice including corporate, international, employment, private client, VAT, SDLT, Stamp Taxes, and customs and excise duty. For illustrative experience, please refer to Featured Cases (see below).

Chancery and commercial
During Julian’s practice career, first as a solicitor and then as a barrister, he has developed a wide-ranging knowledge and understanding of company, partnership, intellectual property, trusts and insolvency law. This enables him to advise clients with a good appreciation of the wider issues relevant to these cases.

Directory recommendations

Legal 500: “His experience as a solicitor gives him a unique insight and marks him out at the Bar.”
Ranked in Chambers and Partners UK for Tax in 2023, 2023, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011: He is “very bright and mixes commercial acumen with the academic rigour required in tax work.”

Kevin Hindley, Partner, AndersentTax, an independent tax consultancy (previously a founding partner of the UK tax firm of Alvarez & Marsal): “I have used Julian as tax counsel for my clients and also as a second review for the tax technical aspects of client work since starting my own, independent tax consultancy. I find Julian highly accessible and user friendly in his role as counsel. His advice is efficient, to the point and includes decisive recommendations of the best way to proceed in any given client scenario. Julian has a wide-ranging knowledge of tax and, often more importantly, general legal issues. This is highly valued by me and my clients alike. My clients are most often engaged in complex transactions. Julian’s advice is always commercially-focused and this is essential for my client base. His personable approach also ensures my clients like him as well as his advice.”

Head of Finance, Real Estate Fund: “We had a complicated VAT issue for which our usual advisors were unable to help. Julian was able to step in and provide expert advice in a timely manner and was able to help us reach a successful conclusion. I would be more than happy to contact him again and to recommend him to anyone needing assistance in dealing with HMRC.”

Tax QC, Lincoln’s Inn: “I worked with Julian on a number of projects and his analysis was both of a very high technical standard and commercially astute.”

Head of Transfer Pricing at a Financial Institution: “In addition to being very able technically Julian has a good understanding of practical in-house issues. He is a lawyer with great integrity and will not hesitate to advise you that something does not work. In my experience, this is not a quality found in all lawyers!”
CFO, UK Corporate Group: “Julian’s ability to explain complex tax technical arguments in a straightforward way was very beneficial to me and the other advisers. His advocacy skills are first class and he is great to work with.’’

Iain Robertson, Tax Consultant: “Julian is a pleasure to work with , responsive and practical in dealing effectively with the issues arising. He has a deep and broad-based technical knowledge, extending to other areas of law relevant when considering tax matters. His thorough and highly professional approach in preparing for litigation is reflected in both the written submissions and well-conceived and fluent advocacy.”

Professional experience

Julian Hickey has over 20 years of tax advisory experience, both as a solicitor and then as a barrister. He has a particular expertise in corporate tax and indirect tax (VAT and Stamp Tax) matters and is uniquely suited to advising other tax professionals on their client related structing of transactions and planning solutions for clients; providing a second pair of eyes to ensure the advisor has correctly interpreted and applied the law.

Julian’s UK and international tax advisory practice (for both corporates and individuals) covers all areas of tax law, but he has a particular interest in:

• Corporate tax (and related income tax and capital gains tax), VAT and Stamp Tax matters

• Mergers and acquisitions

• Group transactions

• Corporate reconstructions

• Commercial supply chain

• Real estate investment and development

• Individual and corporate tax residence

• Entity recognition

• High net worth family office investments and disposals

• Advising on corporate take-overs and reconstructions, involving high net worth individuals;

• Advising on real estate transactions (development and investment) and tax issues;

• Advising on central management & control issues, including review of existing structures;

• Advising on establishing operations in the UK either as subsidiary or branch operations/incorporation of branches;

• Advising on exit scenarios for investors/management in target companies/deferred consideration/earn-out/ratchets/ITEPA 2003;

• Advising on reconstructions, demergers, liquidations;

• Advising on application of UK offshore fund rules to structures;

• Advising on acquisition and leasing of aircraft;

• Rectification claims concerning tax planning; allegations of mistake and false representations;

• Professional negligence (claims and defence) relating to tax advice and solicitors’ negligence;

• Intellectual property, royalties and withholding tax issues

• Application of tax anti-avoidance provisions, sole or main purpose provisions relevant to individuals and corporations

• Disposals of businesses and availability of substantial shareholding relief

• VAT treatment of supply chains relating to transport, property rental, healthcare, travel

Featured cases

• Julian has acted for clients in two recent cases that were live streamed and are available to now view on the Court of Appeal YouTube archive:

  • Oisin Fanning (1 March 2023) (Court 70):

  • Link here: https://www.judiciary.uk/live-hearings/fanning-appellant-v-hm-revenue-customs-respondent/

  • Julian represented the Appellant on HMRC’s challenge to tax planning concerning a high value property in central London. The case involved difficult issues of statutory interpretation. The case was before Lord Justice Jackson, Lord Justice Lewis, Lady Justice Falk. This case was reported in the Times and major tax and non-tax law reports.

  •  Paul Bell & Mark Mitchell v HMRC (25 January 2023) (Court 63):

  • Link here: https://www.judiciary.uk/live-hearings/bell-appellant-v-hm-revenue-customs-anr-respondents/

  • Julian represented Mr. Mitchell (having successfully represented the client in the First tier Tax Tribunal and Upper Tribunal) concerning the disclosure of confidential documents, and the extent to which documents can be relied on by HMRC / another party in a tax appeal. The case was before Lord Justice Arnold, Lady Justice Carr and Lady Justice Whipple. This case was reported in the Times and major tax and non-tax law reports.

Kavanagh v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 173 establishes the principle that if a trust exists over unsegregated property a claim to entrepreneurs relief is available. I made legal submissions on whether a trust existed (whether express, constructive or implied) over a decimal percentage of shares held by other shareholders; and whether this justified a claim to entrepreneurs’ relief under the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992, sections 169I and 169S; further whether an unidentified percentage of shares met the requirement for certainty of subject-matter to constitute a trust; and whether or not the appellant held at least 5% of the ordinary share capital of the company and at least 5% of the voting rights by virtue of a beneficial holding in respect of shares held on trust. The case involved a number of submissions on the evidence, and having to conduct examination in chief and re-examination of the appellant’s 3 witnesses.

Link here for decision: SEAMUS KAVANAGH v Revenue & Customs (Capital Gains Tax entrepreneurs’ relief) [2022] UKFTT 173 (TC) (31 May 2022) (bailii.org)

Fanning v HMRC [2022] STC 256 (Upper Tribunal). The legal issues concerned the availability of Stamp Duty Land Tax subsale relief and its application to an option granted in respect of land. See Court of Appeal above.
Link here for decision: $ (bailii.org)

Shane de Silva v Revenue and Customs [2021] UKUT 275 (TCC) (Upper Tribunal) concerned an application for permission to notify a late appeal to HMRC, and whether the First-tier Tribunal had made an error of law in refusing permission, and the extent to which the FTT had engaged properly with the strength of the Appellant’s case in carrying out its balancing exercise. UT held the FTT did make an error of law in failing to follow the guidance in Martland and in failing to give reasons which properly supported its decision, but the FTT’s decision was nonetheless a correct one in the light of the Martland criteria applied correctly.
Link here for decision: 275.pdf (bailii.org)

Mark Mitchell v HMRC [2021] UKUT 250 (TCC) (Upper Tribunal) the issue concerned the extent of permissible disclosure of documents by HMRC relating to the tax and business affairs of one appellant (Mr. Mitchell) to another appellant (Mr. Bell) in respect of the validity of personal liability notices; and whether either appellant was a shadow direction under Finance Act 2007, Schedule 24, paragraph 24. See Court of Appeal above.
Link here for decision: Mark Mitchell and Paul Bell v Revenue and Customs [2021] UKUT 250 (TCC) (8 October 2021) (bailii.org)

Bhaur & Others v IVM PCC & Others (Chancery Division) [2021] EWHC 2581 concerned the extent to which a transfer to an offshore trust (an EBT) could be set aside for mistake of law and/or fact. Defence to mistake claim / rectification in respect of employee benefit trusts.
Link here for decision: Bhaur & Ors v Equity First Trustees (Nevis) Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2581 (Ch) (28 September 2021) (bailii.org)

Kingsley Douglas v Revenue and Customs [2021] UKUT 163 (Upper Tribunal). Validity of VAT best judgment assessments, and whether the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) had erred in making factual findings beyond the agreed issues, whether the FTT had failed to take into account relevant evidence, whether the FTT made a finding not available to it on the evidence. Represented HMRC.
Link here for decision: $ (bailii.org)

M&M Builders (Norfolk) Limited v HMRC [2021] UKUT 103 (Upper Tribunal). Annuity given as consideration for purchase of property, whether s.52 (annuity provisions) or s53 (sale involving a company) applied to determine taxable consideration; and whether s.52 limited SDLT or s.53 imposed market value consideration for SDLT purposes.
Link here for decision: $ (bailii.org)

Mark Shaw (as nominated member of TAL CPT Land Development Partnership LLP) v Revenue and Customs [2021] UKUT 100 (Upper Tribunal): concerned a novel point regarding temporary disuse and the availability of Industrial Buildings Allowances (IBAs), which were designed to encourage capital investment in buildings. HMRC argued there was no entitlement to any IBAs because buildings could only be regarded as in temporary disuse if, following a period they were actually brought back into use (which the buildings in this case were not).
Link here for decision: $ (bailii.org)

Hannah, R (On the Application Of) v The Taxation Disciplinary Board Ltd [2021] EWHC 1069 (Admin) (Administrative Court, High Court): whether the Chartered Institute of Taxation is a public body, and whether referral of a CIOT member to the Taxation Disciplinary Board was in breach of natural justice.

Hannah & Anor v Revenue & Customs [2021] UKUT 22 (Upper Tribunal) (SDLT – whether annuity sole consideration for house purchase, ss. 52, s.75A) [2019] UKFTT 342 (TC).
Link here for decision: $ (bailii.org)

Mobey v Revenue and Customs [2021] UKFTT 122 (First-tier Tax Tribunal) the case concerned Stamp Duty Land Tax and the availability of Multiple Dwellings Relief for an annexe to a main building.
Link here for decision: TC08103.pdf (bailii.org)

Kevin McCabe v HMRC [2020] STC 2148 (Upper Tribunal) the point concerned the correct legal principles to be applied in an application for specific disclosure of documents in respect of information shared between HMRC and the Belgian tax authorities pursuant to inter-jurisdictional co-operation and confidentiality obligations under Article 25 (Mutual Agreement Procedure) of the UK-Belgian Double Taxation Agreement. I had to make detailed submissions on the case law relating to disclosure, and the nature of the test for relevance and how it should be determined in connection with the issues in dispute between the parties concerning the tax residence of Mr. McCabe, including the scope of any disclosure application where a party claims documents are confidential (including the scope and application of the decision in National Crime Agency v Abacha [2016]). The case is relevant to all the UK tax treaties (in excess of 100).
Link here for decision: $ (bailii.org)

Development Securities (No.9) Ltd & Others v HMRC [2020] EWCA Civ 1705 (CA), [2019] STC 1424 (UT) (won on appeal from FTT, reversed in CA) (corporate tax residence / central management & control Jersey / UK / dual residence).

Mark Mitchell & Paul Bell [2021] UKUT 250, [2020] UKFTT 102 (TC) (First-tier Tax Tribunal). HMRC seeking to rely on documents confidential to one appeal in joined appeal concerning that appellant and another appellant – first appellant objecting – decision based on relevance of material – application allowed in part before FTT. See UT and Court of Appeal decisions above.

Link here for decision: TC07598.pdf (bailii.org)

MCX Dunlin (UK) Ltd v Revenue And Customs [2020] EWHC 11 (Ch) (13 January 2020) (whether repayments were Advance Petroleum Revenue Tax or PRT; represented HMRC)

Albert House Property Finance PCC Ltd & Anor v Revenue & Customs [2020] UKUT 373 and [2019] UKFTT 732 (TC) (3 December 2019) (whether SDLT appeals validly withdrawn)Newton & Anor v Revenue & Customs (SDLT – whether discovery – whether subsale relief applied) [2019] UKFTT 688 (TC) (12 November 2019) (subject to PTA)

Turners (Soham) Ltd v HMRC [2019] STI 959: computation of trading profits / application of statutory renewals allowance; whether trucks and trailers “tools”

Pulsin Ltd v HMRC [2019] STI 222 – represented HMRC, whether product an item of “confectionary” or a “cake” for VAT purposes.

DAC Beachcroft v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 0502 (TC): Information notice, application of legal professional privilege, Information Notice: Resolution of Disputes as to Privileged Communications Regulations 2009

National Federation of Occupational Pensioners v HMRC [2018] STI 390: VAT / unincorporated associations / whether separate person for VAT

Frosh, Joyce, Goring-Thomas v HMRC [2017] STC 1941 (UT) (closure notices / effect of invitation to settle letters)
X v Y: defence to professional negligence claim against tax advisers

Travel Republic Limited v HMRC [2018] EWHC 3905 (Admin): VAT treatment of credit card fees / ancillary to principal supplies / Business Brief 18/06 / legitimate expectation

Omega LLPs v HMRC: represented HMRC in FtT / partnership tax appeal / stay application

Publications

Law and Regulation of Tax Professionals, Bloomsbury Professional Publishing · Sep 4, 2021. Co-Author, Law and Regulation of Tax Professionals examines all aspects of the obligations and liabilities of tax advisers arising out of professional standards, contract, tort, tax legislation (including DOTAS, POTAS and DAC6) and criminal tax evasion sanctions against the backdrop of legislative and case law.

The purpose of this book is to provide a comprehensive overview of the law and associated matters concerning the regulation of tax professionals; and to seek to draw some practical lessons as to how the tax professional and the business they work in can organise themselves to comply with what is required by regulation, best practice and to eliminate so far as possible the consequences of mistakes and unforeseen occurrences.

Illustrated throughout with examples and reference to relevant case law, as well as checklists to help the reader put measures in place to protect themselves against the risk of becoming involved in breach of regulatory standards, this title is essential for tax professionals (including ICAEWs, CTAs, TEPs), tax agents, in house tax advisers, and lawyers advising on tax matters.

A Practical Guide to Tax Disputes, Lexis · Sep 1, 2021. Co-Author. This edition is designed to give anybody involved in tax litigation a solid grounding of the relevant law and provide them with practical insights into the best way of preparing for and taking part in a hearing. It focuses on a considerable number of legislative changes that have come into force since the last edition, including accelerated payment notices and follower notices. A new section on criminal practice and procedure gives an important insight into this area.

VAT and The City, CCH · Dec 22, 2012. Co-author, VAT & The City provides essential expert guidance into how VAT affects transactions in the financial sector including banking, finance, securities, investment, insurance and commodities and help on approaching the handling of VAT affairs. As discussed in the Foreword by Michael Conlon QC: 'VAT and The City is the invaluable vade-mecum for the practitioner and in-house expert alike.'

Internet Business: Commerce and Tax, Jordans · Mar 17, 2012. In depth analysis of tax structuring for e-commerce.

• Email:

  suleman.ahmed@exchequerchambers.com

Suleman possesses a versatile practice in Revenue law, encompassing all facets of Chambers' areas of specialisation in both indirect and direct taxes, both at a national and international level. He advises and represents a diverse clientele on tax-related issues, while also handling domestic and cross-border chancery and commercial litigation.

Suleman’s extensive knowledge in taxation, and chancery and commercial law eliminates the need for clients to choose between specialised practitioners or contemplate seeking separate guidance for each area.

Some of Suleman’s recent tax work has included advising on mixed-member partnerships; partnership re-structuring; advising on group reorganisations; Schedule 36 notices; advising HNW non-resident clients on their UK tax obligations; advising on international tax issues arising under various DTCs; advising on VAT disputes arising in the recruitment and other sectors, which has resulted in resisting the grant of freezing injunctions and defending claims under insolvency legislation; advising on employee benefits and EBTs; advising on issues arising from failed film schemes; and advising on the availability of various agricultural and similar reliefs.

Suleman’s chancery and commercial work has resulted in him being involved in several international arbitration matters one of which was a $150m ICSID arbitration where a foreign bank initiated a claim against an African power company. He has also represented an international airline against its general sales agent in a civil fraud claim, and is currently advising international investors in relation to claims they may bring against host states for breaches of the relevant bilateral investment treaties. Suleman has significant experience in insolvency work; urgent applications for injunctive and other reliefs (including applying for and opposing freezing injunctions and search orders); summary judgment and strikeout applications; and partnership and company disputes. He is currently acting in an ongoing multi-million-pound claim against a former director for breaches of fiduciary duties where the director diverted funds amounting to more than the company’s profits over a six-year period to a charity of which he was trustee, and where the director removed the company’s documents to his home. A freezing injunction and search order (to obtain the documents) have been granted by the High Court. He is also instructed in various offshore trust litigation, as well as in litigation relating to the restitution of overpaid tax. Suleman has a particular interest in partnership-related work arising from private equity (including limited partnerships), professional practices, and work in the agricultural and equine sector.

Suleman has honed an unparalleled proficiency in deciphering and implementing financial rules by virtue of his accounting and finance background, particularly within the dynamic landscape of sports organisations. He is able to provide strategic guidance to sports clubs and federations on compliance with financial (and financial fair play) regulations. This includes meticulous evaluation of financial documentation, structures, and transactions; advising on risk mitigation strategies; and advising clubs and teams in related regulatory proceedings. Moreover, he is also able to act for clubs and teams in non-finance-related matters when making representations to sporting bodies, and in arbitrations and regulatory disputes.

Suleman is an ADR Group accredited civil and commercial mediator, and is authorised to accept instructions on a direct access basis and to conduct litigation.

• Telephone: 020 3150 0001

• Email:

  tyroon.win@exchequerchambers.com

Tyroon Win joined Exchequer Chambers, part of The Barrister Group in 2024 from Partnership Counsel.

Tyroon works closely with members of Chambers and clients offering guidance on suitable members and relevant fee structures. He understands the needs of clients and deals with the day to day management of Chambers.

Tyroon Win was the practice manager at Partnership Counsel from 2006, having previously worked for a US law firm in the City of London for 16 years.

"...Tyroon Win is excellent. He's both responsive and highly knowledgeable"

Chambers UK Bar Guide (2024)

"Tyroon Win is always very responsive, easy to deal with and a pleasure to work with." "Permit me to be clear: Tyroon is a star. From the first moment I met him, he was the personification of ‘can do’. He consistently delivers in terms of both accessibility and administration. A clerk par excellence."

Chambers and Partners (2023)

“Commentators say of ... Tyroon Win: "Tyroon is really responsive and I find him very easy to work with," and: "… there is a very personal service from Tyroon." Solicitors note the members' ability to work as part of a team and willingness to accommodate conferences away from chambers as and when required.”

Chambers and Partners (2022)

LinkedIn