The Divisional Court (Whipple LJ, Fordham J) has refused the Claimants permission to bring judicial review in this high-profile and widely publicised challenge to the Government’s decision to reform agricultural and business property relief for inheritance tax on the basis of inadequate consultation.

Following a rolled-up hearing in which the Speaker of the House of Commons was joined as an interested party, the Court refused permission on the basis that:

  • None of the Government’s published materials on consultation were even arguably sufficiently clear and unambiguous to give rise to an expectation of consultation, but were instead in the nature of political commitments;
  • Even if such expectation had arisen, to introduce public law constraints on a pre-legislative consultation exercise would have the effect of imposing pre-conditions on a Member of Parliament’s ability to introduce legislation at the time and in the form of their choosing, constituting an infringement of the principle of Parliamentary privilege contrary to Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688; and
  • The claim was in any event out of time.

Arthur Wong (led by Mark Fell KC) acted for the Defendants.

You can read a copy of the judgment here.

This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of PCTC or by PCTC as a whole.