R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
In this issue: Budgets and Finance Bills VAT Companies and corporation tax Real estate tax International Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Tax Highlights 2025/2026 Budgets and Finance Bills Second reading and committal of Finance Bill 2026 On 16 December 2025, Finance Bill 2026 (also referred to as Finance ( No 2) Bill 2024–26) ( FB 2026) had its second reading in the House of Commons. The House then resolved to split further consideration of FB 2026 between a Committee of the whole House and a Public Bill Committee. The Committee of the whole House will take the clauses and Schedules on the income tax charge and rates (clauses 1 to 8 and Schedules 1 and 2), agricultural property relief and business property relief (clause 62 and...
What is the background to the forthcoming OGPM announced at Budget 2025? The EPL was brought in during 2022 as a temporary windfall levy to capture exceptional profits generated by high oil and gas prices, themselves prompted by turbulence in global markets, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It was meant to conclude in 2025 but has been extended more than once. As part of planning for its termination, the government sought a longer-term framework to ensure the tax system can react to price shocks once the EPL ends. The OGPM embodies that framework. A consultation opened in spring 2025 and, at Budget 2025, the government confirmed it would proceed with the OGPM and set out further details of the measure. What is the OGPM? The OGPM will operate as a revenue-based charge of 35% on receipts above a defined threshold. It will apply where a...
The Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 1588 A corporate group developed a residential scheme, with the concluding phase being the transfer of a 50‑storey tower block to a special purpose vehicle ( SPV) to ring‑fence risks, contain potential liabilities and improve financial flexibility. After consulting tax advisers, the group executed a set of same‑day steps intended to ‘step up’ the tax cost of the project, so the SPV would be treated as acquiring it at market value without tax charges arising en route. In broad terms, the property‑owning company granted a 999‑year lease to another group entity, B64. The appellant, incorporated to serve as the SPV, then acquired the shares in B64, and the lease was subsequently transferred to it by way of distribution. After an HMRC enquiry, the appellant accepted the planning had not produced the...
In this issue: Budgets and Finance Bills Companies and corporation tax Real estate tax International Devolution Employment taxes Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Budgets and Finance Bills Finance Bill 2026— Closing in on promoters of tax avoidance schemes The government is bringing forward, in Finance Bill 2026, new provisions to clamp down on the promotion of marketed tax avoidance schemes. Pinsent Masons’ Contentious Tax Legal Directors, Abigail Mc Gregor and Ian Robotham, examine the changes and reflect on their real-world impact. See News Analysis: Finance Bill 2026— Closing in on promoters of tax avoidance schemes. Finance Bill 2026— Loan charge review: Final Report and government response The independent review’s Final Report on the Loan Charge, and the government’s reply to it, were released alongside Budget 2025; Finance Bill 2026 now...
Why was an independent review of the loan charge commissioned, and what were the objectives of the review? For nearly ten years, the Loan Charge has stirred continuing dispute. An independent review in 2019 delivered some middle ground between HMRC and affected taxpayers, yet many have still been unable to finalise their positions with HMRC. A further independent review, announced at Autumn Budget 2024, was designed to break this deadlock, enabling this group to reach settlements with HMRC while safeguarding fairness for all taxpayers and preserving HMRC’s ability to collect tax that is properly due. Its purpose was to unlock resolution for those still stuck, without diluting equity across the system or weakening HMRC’s collection remit. What were the recommendations made by the Final Report? The Final Report maintains that, although taxpayers must take responsibility for their own tax affairs, the Loan Charge was an...
What lies behind the measures announced at Budget 2025, and set out in Finance Bill 2026, aimed at promoters of marketed tax avoidance? Although the government’s recent policy paper and earlier consultations use the term ‘promoters’, the scope of the changes extends to a far broader population indeed. This marks the latest step in HMRC’s sustained drive to eliminate entirely the practice of creating a ‘tax avoidance scheme’. What began with DOTAS ( Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes) in 2004 has widened markedly over the intervening twenty years. Across that period, its reach and application have expanded significantly and persistently too. These particular proposals first appeared in a consultation announced at the Autumn Budget 2024 and launched at the Spring Statement 2025, and those proceeding now feature in Finance Bill 2026 (also known as Finance ( No 2) Bill 2024–26), published on 4 December 2025. What are the...
County Insurance Services Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1440 ( TC) The partnership commenced in 1984, trading from retail premises and providing a diverse blend of independent financial advice, personal lines cover and commercial insurance services. Around 1 April 2002, the split of business was roughly 55% independent financial advice, 30% personal insurance and 15% commercial insurance, respectively. In subsequent years the advisory side progressively waned, and in 2006 the firm disposed of its independent financial advice arm, notified the FSA, and, accordingly, its independent financial advice permissions were then formally withdrawn. Around that period it received notice to quit its high-street site, subsequently relocated in 2007 to larger business-park offices for its operations, and, in particular, refocused on home insurance and rural commercial policies, leaning increasingly on a wholesale model. In 2013 a company was incorporated which acquired the...
3i Plc v Decesare (as representative member of the 3i Group Pension Plan) and other companies [2025] EWHC 3023 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? It is commonly understood that a ruling fixing the meaning of terms in one instrument does not bind a later court faced with different wording, yet earlier decisions can still carry weight as illustrations of how particular expressions might be interpreted elsewhere, in light of the reasoning for preferring one construction over another. In British Broadcasting Corporation v BBC Pension Trust [2024] EWCA Civ 767 (the BBC case), the Court of Appeal examined an amendment power which barred changes from operating in relation to active members whose interests were said by the scheme actuary to be affected, save where specified exceptions applied. No amendment was to take effect for active members unless one of several...
In this issue: Budgets and Finance Bills Taxes management and litigation Real estate tax VAT Business structures Devolution Employment taxes Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Budgets and Finance Bills Finance Bill 2026 published Finance ( No 2) Bill 2024–26 was released on 4 December 2025 with accompanying explanatory notes. Also referred to as Finance Bill 2025–26 and Finance Bill 2026 ( FB 2026), it was presented in the House of Commons and received first reading on 2 December 2025. We have issued News Analysis on the publication of FB 2026. For full tracking of FB 2026—covering a synopsis of each measure or grouped measures, commencement dates and links to expanded analysis—see Tax— Finance Bill 2026 tracker—progress through Parliament. This live resource will be updated as the Bill advances, detailing each Parliamentary stage and any amendments. See: Finance ( No 2) Bill...
On 27 November 2025, the European Court of Justice ( ECJ) ruled that Portugal may apply stricter conditions to non-resident pension schemes when an exemption is sought in advance. The court said the Portuguese tax administration ought to accept other forms of proof for future claims. Santander’s pension scheme in Spain pursued a refund of tax arising from cross-border dealings. However, it could not obtain a certificate from the Spanish authorities to support its Portuguese claim, the ECJ formally recorded......
Places for People Homes Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1417 ( TC) The appeal centred on the VAT treatment of supplies delivered by a number of maintenance trust companies ( MTCs) in relation to 25 blocks of flats (the ‘properties’). It was common ground that the MTCs bore obligations to maintain the structure and common parts of the properties, and that they made supplies in carrying out those obligations (the ‘maintenance services’). The lessees of the flats within the properties made periodic payments to the MTCs to cover the cost of maintenance services. Each MTC retained a fee for its role, paying the balance into a trust, which it then managed in its capacity as trustee. The costs that each MTC incurred in maintaining the properties were drawn from the trust fund, and included fees charged by the management company, the direct salary costs of staff...
Executor of Goudman- Peachey v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1402 ( TC) The taxpayer and her late husband acquired a rural estate for around £8 million. Although the holding comprised nine distinct Land Registry titles, the acquisition proceeded as a single deal. The estate included a principal house, two ancillary dwellings, a swimming pool and equestrian amenities, plus 150 acres used in part for deer and other animal grazing. The vendors had operated the property as an equestrian facility, for sheep grazing and as a commercial deer park, with a portion of land let to a farmer for maize cultivation. Two days before the transaction, the taxpayer entered into an agreement to buy the 130 deer on the estate and for the existing manager to continue......
HMRC v Michael Breen [2025] UKFTT 1415 ( TC) Ordinarily, at the FTT each party bears its own costs as a general rule, usually. There are, however, exceptions to that default position, for instance where a party acts 'unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting proceedings' ( FTT Rules, SI 2009/273, rule 10(1)(b)). In this matter, the taxpayer, Mr Breen, failed to engage with the enquiry and, after lodging his appeal, with the FTT process. That extended to non-compliance with case management directions (the Directions) as well as two Unless Orders. Consequently, his appeal was automatically struck out in November 2020. His bid to have the proceedings reinstated succeeded in the FTT. But HMRC overturned that reinstatement at the Upper Tribunal ( UT) in 2023 (the UT Decision). The UT concluded there had been 'serious and significant' breaches with no...
A D Bly Groundworks and Civil Engineering Ltd and another v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2025] EWCA Civ 1443 What are the practical implications of this case? The CA confirmed that the proper way to decide if expenditure is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade is to apply established authorities. The principles are as follows. Because the taxpayer’s “object” in making the outlay must be identified, it follows that—save in plain cases—the First-tier Tribunal ( FTT) should examine the taxpayer’s state of mind at the time the cost is incurred ( Lord Brightman in Mallalieu v Drummond ( Inspector of Taxes) [1983] 2 All ER 1095 at 1100, [1983] STC 665 at 669, [1983] 2 AC 861 at 870 ( Mallalieu)). In conducting that inquiry, the object of the spending must be kept separate from its effects. Where the sole...
In this edition: Budgets and Finance Bills Corporation tax and companies International Topical issues Employment taxation Real estate tax Daily and weekly news briefings Updated and new content Dates for your diary Trackers Helpful information Budgets and Finance Bills Budget 2025 On Wednesday 26 November 2025, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, presented the Budget......
On 26 November 2025, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, presented the Labour administration’s second Budget, widely referred to simply as Budget 2025. On the same day, the Office for Budget Responsibility ( OBR) set out its economic and fiscal outlook for the UK. Proceedings opened poorly, and chaotically, with an OBR forecast leaking amidst a slew of prior government-led briefings and the release of a frustratingly static index of ‘ Budget 2025 tax related documents’ to which hyperlinks were not inserted until close to 8pm, together with a piecemeal, stop‑start publication of tax information across scattered web pages, sending readers on a fruitless treasure hunt for clarity or coherence and with no appearance whatsoever of the Overview of Tax Legislation and Rates ( OOTLAR). Headline measures comprised, among other items, extending, for another three years to April 2031, the existing...
A D Bly Groundworks and Civil Engineering Ltd and another v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 1443 Both taxpayers retained the same firm of chartered accountants to set up an UURBS, under which they undertook to grant directors and certain key staff a future pension. They booked provisions in their accounts to reflect the obligation to meet later pension outgoings. Those provisions were pitched at between 80% and 100% of profits before tax for each period. The accountants promoted the arrangement to several clients and notified HMRC under the DOTAS provisions. The two companies’ appeals proceeded as lead cases before the First-tier Tax Tribunal ( FTT). The FTT and UT had dismissed......
Milton Park Holdings Ltd and another v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1353 ( TC) A partnership ( MPP) ran a care homes business from properties that were owned by two of the individual partners. Two corporate partners, BHL and BCSL, which were controlled by those individual partners, supplied staffing and administrative services. The background to the dispute comprised the following transactions: The individual partners incorporated a company, MPHL, in Jersey. MPHL acquired the business and assets of MPP, including an asserted £173 million of goodwill, which it subsequently amortised in its accounts. MPHL also acquired another company, MPL, from one of the individual partners. MPL entered into a partnership ( MCP) with (i) the son of one of the individual partners, (ii) BHL, and (iii) BCSL to carry on the nursing home business......
Jordi Carulla Font v HMRC [2025] EWHC 3057 ( Admin) The taxpayer applied for permission to bring judicial review proceedings against an HMRC decision about his residence status under the UK– Spain DTA. In a letter dated 27 September 2024 (the ‘ Decision’), HMRC concluded that the claimant was treaty resident in Spain for the years 2009–10 to 2015–16, and treaty resident in the UK for 2016–17 to 2020–21. That marked a departure from HMRC’s earlier stance that he was treaty resident in the UK throughout the relevant period. He argued that the shift frustrated legitimate expectations and was vitiated by errors of law in applying the DTA tie‑breaker rules, notably the centre of vital interests ( COVI) and habitual abode criteria. The judge first addressed timeliness. He decided the claim was not out of time: although an email of 21 June 2024 set out...
In this issue: Budget and Finance Bills VAT Anti-avoidance Taxes management and litigation Pensions tax International Key developments Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Budget and Finance Bills Autumn Budget 2025 Chancellor Rachel Reeves is set to present the Budget on Wednesday 26 November 2025. As ever, we will produce overnight analysis of the principal business tax measures, to be published on the morning of Thursday 27 November 2025... Law Society joins professional services leaders opposing LLP tax proposals The Law Society of England and Wales has teamed up with figures from the wider professional services community to write to Chancellor Rachel Reeves, challenging plans to raise taxes on limited liability partnerships ( LLPs). Their joint...
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...