On the one hand…on the other hand…

Lawyers, other than those at Hart Brown of course, are not infrequently criticised for sitting on the fence in terms of giving legal advice. Bearing in mind that there are still a lot of grey areas in the law which can be the subject of wildly different opinions (until a judge decides what the right answer is) should a lawyer when providing advice be absolutely categoric?

A recent case of Barker-v-Baxendale Walker Solicitors suggests not, and that lawyers may be under a duty to advise their clients that their legal opinion, however reasonably or strongly held, may nevertheless turn out to be wrong.

The claim related to the transfer of company shares into an employee benefit trust (EBT) which was supposed to enable Mr Barker to pass on the financial benefits of his shares to his children whilst avoiding the payment of capital gains tax and inheritance tax. These EBTs cannot be used to benefit individuals who are “connected” with a “participator” in the underlying company. It was agreed by both sides that Mr Barker was a “participator”. The issue was whether “connected” was to be judged at the time of the initial transfer or the subsequent application of the trust monies. The defendant solicitors advised that it would be the latter but, unsurprisingly perhaps, HMRC adopted a different view.

Mr Barker, having subsequently received different legal advice, ended up having to pay over £11million to HMRC before then beginning professional negligence proceedings against the original solicitors. The claimant accepted that although the defendants interpretation could have been correct there was also a significant risk that it could be wrong. The question of negligence was to be decided on whether reasonably competent solicitors would have acted in the way that the defendant solicitors had done.

Having lost at first instance, Mr Barker succeeded in The Court of Appeal which decided that the defendant solicitors did owe a duty to give a specific warning about  the alternative interpretation. The court appears to have been influenced by the fact that this was an aggressive tax avoidance scheme specifically marketed by the defendant firm which “might appear, on the face of it, to be too good to be true”.

Obviously good solicitors still need to provide clear advice as to what their opinion is but need to temper that by identifying the risk of that opinion being wrong so that the client can come to an informed decision as to the true nature and extent of the risks involved.

On the one hand a 60% to 70% chance of advice being right  seems reasonable odds. On the other hand a 30% to 40% chance of it being wrong sounds quite risky.

 

This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues.

Share

Paul Grimwood

Partner, Head of Dispute Resolution

As Head of Dispute Resolution, Paul has extensive experience of dealing with a wide range of disputes focusing in particular on professional negligence, contentious trust...

Partner, Head of Dispute Resolution

Paul Grimwood

As Head of Dispute Resolution, Paul has extensive experience of dealing with a wide range of disputes focusing in particular on professional negligence, contentious trust and estate cases and Inheritance Act claims where he acts for both claimants and defendants, trustees, executors and beneficiaries.

He is a member of the Professional Negligence Lawyers’ Association and the Association of Contentious Trust and Probate Specialists. He is also an ADR Group Accredited Mediator. Paul has, in the past, appeared on local radio as a “legal eagle” responding to listeners’ queries.

Passing his Law Society finals with First Class Honours Paul originally trained at Hart Brown. Having spent two years sharpening up his advocacy skills at another firm Paul returned to Hart Brown as a partner.

As one client put it: “I am very impressed with his thoroughness” and another: “A very professional service delivered in a very personal way”.

“With Hart Brown I had complete success with my claim against my former solicitor. At all stages I had the confidence to proceed based on the clear analysis and communication of my position. I have no hesitation in recommending Hart Brown and particularly Paul Grimwood”.

Head Office

Resolution House
Riverview
Walnut Tree Close
Guildford
Surrey
GU1 4UX

Your Local Office

Guildford - 01483 887766
Cobham - 01932 576789
Cranleigh - 01483 887515
Godalming - 01483 887766
Woking - 01483 887766

Hart Brown Solicitors is the trading name of Hart Brown LLP registered in England and Wales No. OC 425835 whose registered office is Resolution House, Riverview, Walnut Tree Close, Guildford, GU1 4UX and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) No. 658593. Members: N Maud, T Pearce, D Knapp, R Campbell and P Grimwood, Partners: J Crosby, L Harrhy, J Jupp, J Lamont, T Mandelli, V McMurtrie, E Moore, S Osborne, S Powell and G Sanders.

Any reference to a partner in relation to Hart Brown LLP means a member or an employee with the title of Partner of Hart Brown LLP.

© Copyright Hart Brown LLP 2019 - All Rights Reserved. VAT registration no. 211372705