Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

LPP for lawyers only

© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.

21 October 2010

Issue: 4278 / Categories: Tax cases

Prudential v Special Commissioner of Income Tax, Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal ruled that legal professional privilege (LPP) should not be extended to clients of non-legally qualified accountants or tax advisers.

The issue had arisen in connection with a TMA 1970 s 20 notice served on Prudential in November 2007 in connection with a tax avoidance scheme. The company argued that it was not obliged to disclose any documents in relation to advice on tax matters obtained from counsel foreign lawyers and PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Lord Justice Lloyd delivered the judgment. Previous decisions resulted in LPP applying only in relation to lawyers. However counsel for the appellant said that because LPP is a ‘judge-made rule’ it was open to the court to rule that it could apply to advisers other than lawyers.

The judge pointed to the problem of deciding who is an accountant. He said there are several...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Subscribe Now...

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.

Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.

LPP for lawyers only

© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.

21 October 2010

Prudential v Special Commissioner of Income Tax, Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal ruled that legal professional privilege (LPP) should not be extended to clients of non-legally qualified accountants or tax advisers.

The issue had arisen in connection with a TMA 1970 s 20 notice served on Prudential in November 2007 in connection with a tax avoidance scheme. The company argued that it was not obliged to disclose any documents in relation to advice on tax matters obtained from counsel foreign lawyers and PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Lord Justice Lloyd delivered the judgment. Previous decisions resulted in LPP applying only in relation to lawyers. However counsel for the appellant said that because LPP is a ‘judge-made rule’ it was open to the court to rule that it could apply to advisers other than lawyers.

The judge pointed to the problem of deciding who is an accountant. He said there are several...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Subscribe Now...

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.

Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.

Issue:

4278

Categories: Tax cases [1]

SourceURL:

Links:

READERS' FORUM premium icon

Readers forum: Claiming pre-registration input tax Practice tip: 19 December 2024 New Queries: 19 December 2024 Readers’ forum: Should I advise my client to declare income? Readers’ forum: Pension scheme set up as discretionary trust?

FIVE WAYS TO MAKE ACCOUNTS PRODUCTION AND TAX EASIER.
Download the exclusive Xero
free report here.

New queries

Please email any questions you might have
to: taxation@lexisnexis.co.uk.

NEWS

Automated tracking system for taxpayers could save £36m a year, study shows Welsh income tax rates are unchanged Business expenditure on R&D rises in 2023 HMRC targets landlords who may have undeclared rents Lump sums cannot be returned to pension scheme

Third slide

Deadline dates for January 2025

CASES

No extenuating circumstances to extend deadline Delay in issuing penalties was no excuse for late return Sales of occupation income avoidance rules apply Whole of settlement was not subject to tax Payments were taxable as earnings

MOST POPULAR

Readers forum: Claiming pre-registration input tax No extenuating circumstances to extend deadline This week's opinion: 19 December 2024 Automated tracking system for taxpayers could save £36m a year, study shows Welsh income tax rates are unchanged

back to top icon