R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte Wilkinson [2005] UKHL 30

Facts

  • Mr. Wilkinson, a taxpayer, requested the Inland Revenue to grant him a concession similar to that previously extended to another taxpayer in comparable circumstances.
  • The Inland Revenue refused his request, citing that the earlier concession had been made in error and that there was no obligation to repeat it.
  • The case highlighted the tension between allowing flexibility through concessions and ensuring equal application of tax law among all taxpayers.

Issues

  1. Whether the Inland Revenue could lawfully refuse a concession to Mr. Wilkinson, having granted a similar concession to another taxpayer in the past.
  2. Whether public bodies may depart from statutory rules through non-statutory concessions.
  3. Whether administrative discretion in tax matters must be exercised consistently and in accordance with legal standards.

Decision

  • The House of Lords held that the Inland Revenue could not create or grant concessions arbitrarily and without clear limits.
  • Concessions may be useful for managing complex tax systems, but such discretionary powers must be exercised fairly and uniformly.
  • The Revenue could not treat similarly situated taxpayers differently or use past mistakes as justification for inconsistent application.
  • The decision confirmed that the Revenue's role is not to make new rules but to moderate strict legal enforcement in justified, specific cases.

Legal Principles

  • Discretionary powers of public bodies, such as the Inland Revenue, must be exercised consistently, according to established legal standards.
  • Concessions that depart from statutory tax rules must still comply with legality, fairness, and equal treatment principles.
  • Past conduct by public bodies, even if mistaken, may obligate them to act similarly in identical future cases to prevent inconsistent or arbitrary actions.
  • The need for transparency, equal treatment, and judicial review of inconsistent public body decisions is central to fair tax administration.

Conclusion

The House of Lords in R v IRC, ex parte Wilkinson affirmed that while tax authorities may exercise discretion through concessions, such powers are bound by principles of fairness, legality, and consistency, thereby safeguarding taxpayers from arbitrary or unequal treatment by public bodies.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal