Tax Journal article on 'Hely-Hutchinson: was HMRC merely unfair or ‘conspicuously unfair?' by Michael Sherry

22nd September 2017

How should HMRC treat taxpayers who are substantially in the same position but procedurally in different stages of resolving their affairs with HMRC, when it changes its mind about the correct view of the law? After Mansworth v Jelley in 2003, the Revenue’s web guidance allowed many claims for capital losses. Six years later, it changed its mind, even though some cases were still unresolved. HMRC applied the revised view of the law. Mr Hely-Hutchinson applied for judicial review, as he had been given a legitimate expectation as to how he would be dealt with. Although he could show no detrimental reliance, he claimed that to treat him differently from those already settled purely because of procedural reasons was ‘conspicuously unfair’. Whipple J agreed but the Court of Appeal disagrees. Should

not ‘fairness’ be an issue of substance?


To view this article, please click on the download below or go to

Download: pb54_MS_article.pdf

Associated Members

Michael Sherry