This week's opinion: 2 June 2022

Sometimes the right result comes about for the wrong reason. The decision in Marren v Ingles [1980] STC 500 is a classic example. Mr Ingles argued that the deferred consideration he received on the sale of his shares was not taxable: it was simply the repayment of a debt. It is not surprising that this argument was rejected – had it been successful it would have opened up avoidance possibilities. But by treating the deferred consideration as derived from a separate asset rather than simply being further consideration for the original disposal the decision created all sorts of knock-on effects and added unnecessary complications to many parts of the tax system.

I wonder whether the Court of Appeal’s decision in Hoey and others v CRC which we report on page 8 will turn out to be equally problematic. Certainly it could be argued that it gives...