top of page

Y5. Loss and remoteness

Evidence required that earlier settlement would have been reached and produced lower liability for C

 

"[395] This alternative claim was not heavily pressed in argument. The loss flowing from any breach of duty committed in November 2005 or December 2009 can only have been limited to the difference, if any, between such settlement as might have been reached with HMRC on or shortly after those dates, and the settlement that was ultimately achieved. There was no evidence led on the basis of which I could conclude that the claimants would have sought to reach an earlier settlement with HMRC, which I find to have been an inherently unlikely proposition given that (as I explain in more detail in considering section 14A LA 1980 below) HMRC were not actively progressing an investigation into the Schemes at these times." (McClean v. Thornhill [2022] EWHC 457 (Ch), Zacaroli J)

Evidence required that earlier settlement would have been reached and produced lower liability for C
bottom of page