On 11 February 2025 the Court of Appeal Civil Division (Davis LJ and Jeremy Baker LJ) handed down judgment (Hughes v (1) HMRC (2) CPS [2025] EWCA Civ 113) refusing Richard Hughes permission to appeal the decision of Mr Justice Jay (Hughes v (1) HMRC (2) CPS [2024] EWHC 1765 (KB)) to grant the CPS summary judgment in respect of claims brought against it for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office, and damages in the region of £400 million.
Amy Mannion and Gideon Barth, instructed by the Government Legal Department, acted for the CPS, led by Jonathan Kinnear KC and Alexander Cook KC, in the High Court and Court of Appeal.
Mr Hughes, along with others, had been charged in 2015 with conspiracy to cheat the Revenue and cheating the Revenue in connection with his alleged involvement in high value film and pharmaceutical investment schemes, which HMRC asserted did not represent genuine commercial investment opportunities because the investments were designed to fail and specifically obtain a tax advantage. The charges were dismissed in May 2017 on the basis that the judge considered they did not disclose an offence known to law. Mr Hughes brought claims alleging that the CPS lacked reasonable and probable cause for the prosecution and had acted maliciously and in bad faith. In particular he alleged that there had been a failure to investigate the involvement of a major bank and serious errors in the disclosure process. He asserted that the failed prosecution had caused damage to his businesses running to hundreds of millions of pounds.
The Court of Appeal confirmed the decisions of Jay J, that the Claimant had no real prospect of showing a lack of reasonable and probable cause or establishing that the CPS had acted maliciously or in bad faith.
