Search results

Judicial developments in recent treaty cases

Published on 06 Sep 2023.

A spate of recent cases concerning the application of double tax treaties has seen the courts and tribunals striving for common¬sense, policy-driven outcomes.

Judicial review: does the Court of Appeal’s decision in Murphy offer taxpayers a glimmer of hope?

Published on 28 Jun 2023. By Adam Craggs, Partner and Liam McKay, Senior Associate

Judicial review provides a constitutionally important judicial check on the exercise of statutory powers by public bodies such as HMRC. However, the wide margin of appreciation afforded to public bodies by the courts, coupled with recent reforms to the judicial review process, make it a remedy of last resort that can be difficult for taxpayers to pursue successfully. In overturning the High Court’s refusal of the taxpayers’ judicial review claim, the Court of Appeal in Murphy v HMRC confirmed that HMRC had breached their legitimate expectation as to the application of an extra-statutory concession. While Murphy is unlikely to be the harbinger of a wholesale rebalancing of the judicial review scales in the taxpayer’s favour, it is a welcome step in the right direction.

The Times recognises RPC among Best Law Firms 2024

Published on 30 Oct 2023.

International law firm, RPC, has been recognised by The Times in its Best Law Firms 2024 report, an annual ranking of the top 250 law firms in England and Wales.

Restructuring Plans – A Sea Change?

Published on 26 Oct 2022. By Paul Bagon, Partner and Will Beck, Of Counsel and Knowledge Lawyer

Full and frank disclosure means more than just putting relevant matters in evidence – a new year warning in UKIP v Braine & Others

Published on 24 Jan 2020. By Geraldine Elliott, Partner

New year, new reminder of the obligation to make full and frank disclosure in without notice applications, this time in the context of a falling out within the UKIP party. The obligation can only be satisfied by drawing the court's attention to legal or factual matters which could undermine the applicant's own application; it is not enough to simply put relevant matters in evidence before the court (UKIP v Braine & Others). Injunction, confidential, publication and non-disclosure.