Richard Hughes v HMRC & Anor

Richard Hughes v HMRC & Anor

The Claimant had no real prospect of establishing either malicious prosecution or misfeasance in public office, as the CPS had reasonable and probable cause and no evidence of malice or bad faith was shown. The assignment of claims from ZCL and ZRL was void and unenforceable.

Parties
Appellant: Richard Hughes; First Respondent: His Majesty's Revenue & Customs; Second Respondent: The Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Malicious Prosecution, Misfeasance in Public Office, Summary Judgment, Assignment of Claims
Tort Criminal Law Civil Procedure Malicious Prosecution Misfeasance in Public Office Summary Judgment Assignment of Claims

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Hughes

Appellant

His Majesty's Revenue & Customs

First Respondent

The Crown Prosecution Service

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CPS had reasonable and probable cause to prosecute the Claimant
  2. 2 Whether the CPS acted with malice in prosecuting the Claimant
  3. 3 Whether HMRC or CPS committed misfeasance in public office

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant had no real prospect of establishing either malicious prosecution or misfeasance in public office, as the CPS had reasonable and probable cause and no evidence of malice or bad faith was shown. The assignment of claims from ZCL and ZRL was void and unenforceable.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is refused