Pump Court Tax Chambers

The range of tax work taken on by tenants of the set is particularly impressive, with one member saying it ranges “from questions about rocket launches in the 90s, to whether corporate reconstructions has a purpose of reducing taxation or whether beneficiaries under a trust are entitled to call for the trust property”. Whether it be advising private clients on inheritance tax or stamp duty land tax issues, or giving commercial entities advice on business property relief or profit sharing schemes, there is always something happening to keep the cogs turning. We hear that it is common for people in chambers to continue to do a broad spectrum of tax work throughout their practice and to act for both the government and taxpayers, meaning that you can see both sides of the coin. Pump Court Tax Chambers is also leading the way for the use and development of alternative dispute resolution in the tax sphere.

You need only look at some of Pump Court Tax Chambers’ recent cases to see the quality — and breadth — of the work on offer. In the Supreme Court, Elizabeth Wilson KC and Joshua Stevens acted for HMRC in a dispute concerning offshore windfarms, with the court considering whether the cost of environmental, seabed and design studies for windfarm projects qualified for plant and machinery capital allowances. The answer, unanimously, was no. Meanwhile, Arthur Wong, led by Mark Fell KC, acted for the government in a high-profile judicial review challenge to reforms of agricultural and business property relief for inheritance tax, a neat reminder that tax can stray quickly into public law, politics and parliamentary privilege.

The set’s commercial tax work is no less heavyweight. Thomas Chacko and Ronan Magee acted for HMRC in litigation involving Boston Consulting Group and the tax treatment of long-term incentive arrangements for UK partners of the global consultancy, while James Henderson and Arthur Wong appeared in the Court of Appeal in a stamp duty land tax dispute involving Tower One St George Wharf, the luxury riverside development in Vauxhall. Ben Elliott, meanwhile, acted for HMRC in a first-of-its-kind case in which the High Court made an order winding up a tax avoidance promoter under new Finance Act powers. Throw in Court of Appeal work on EU tax law and corporate migrations, disputes over Glencore dividends and the leading authority on the taxation of LLPs in BlueCrest Capital Management v HMRC, and the idea that tax law is dry starts to look rather hard to sustain.

Of course, work-life balance can be unpredictable at the bar. The good thing about tax is that the mixture of litigation and advisory work allows for a good balance to be struck. One tenant tells us that “tax litigation is different from commercial litigation as it is generally slower paced”. Whilst you will occasionally need to do something last minute such as an urgent injunction, it is generally easier to plan ahead at the tax bar than it is in other areas. The clerks at Pump Court Tax Chambers are also said to be “very supportive” and they make allowances for other commitments outside of work.

As a comparatively small chambers, Pump Court Tax is able to maintain a “highly collaborative atmosphere” with an open-door policy throughout the set. There is a chambers’ coffee multiple times a week, a juniors’ tea once a week, and a group chat for juniors, all of which allows conversations and questions about cases to flow. There is also a mentorship system, in which all junior tenants are assigned a group of more senior tenants who support them. Members are said to be “exceptionally generous with their time” when it comes to helping others. One insider tells us that everyone within chambers is “gentle and academic” with a “very supportive atmosphere” pervading the culture.

Outside of work, there are also opportunities for members to mix. Pump Court Tax Chambers has a Social Events Committee which organises a variety of events. There is a monthly chambers’ tea with sparkling wine, a monthly chambers’ lunch, and also events outside of the set such as netball matches, gallery tours, and sports events. Given that some people still work from home, remote events are also still organised.
For those coming into chambers, Pump Court Tax finds itself on Bedford row in a building which is a “beautiful period building at the front”. Apparently the annexe is “less handsome but a bit more modern”. The technology and IT support have been upgraded over the summer, and continue to receive good ratings, with “support available whenever required”. For those working remotely, it is possible to access everything from your laptop or tablet. We are told that chambers are “always looking to develop and improve its use of technology”.

For those wishing to apply for pupillage at Pump Court Tax Chambers, they should submit their application through the Pupillage Gateway. Around 25 of the highest-scoring candidates are invited to interview, in which a short problem question will be provided to the candidates 20 minutes beforehand. Typically, this will involve statutory interpretation or a simple set of facts. Approximately 10 candidates will then progress to a second-round, which will consist of a written exercise to be completed within a set time. Where necessary, a third round consisting of interviews will be held.

The criteria on which candidates are judged include academic ability, ability to communicate clearly (both on paper and orally), confidence, teamwork, a commitment to diversity and equality, a desire to work hard, and evidence of commitment to and interest in practice at the Bar. Candidates do not need to have academic or professional experience of tax or tax law but should have considered why they are interested in a career at the tax bar.

The one lucky candidate selected for pupillage each year will receive an award of £75,000. The pupil will sit with one supervisor until Christmas, allowing them to settle in and begin learning about tax law. During the second six, there is a focus on private client tax. The pupil will spend three months with one supervisor, then rotate through three or four supervisors in the final three months, allowing them to see as broad a range of work as possible. The pupil will also begin to be asked to complete work for other tenants. The pupillage is non-practicing, allowing the focus to be on learning — this makes sense given that many pupils will never have studied tax law before! The training is said to be “excellent” and “followed up by a great mentoring scheme”.

Pump Court Tax Chambers is proud to be a founding partner of Bridging the Bar, a charity committed to the promotion of equal opportunities and diversity at the bar. As well as its own mini-pupillage programme, it also offers minis through this initiative. The set also supports parental leave and flexible working.

In the year between bar school and starting pupillage, I was offered a scholarship by Lincoln’s Inn to do an internship (or ‘stage’) in the European Commission in the office of the Hearing Officer for Competition Proceedings. The Hearing Officers’ task is to safeguard the procedural rights of all parties involved in competition proceedings — including the parties undergoing a merger or the subject of a Statement of Objections and other actors in the market who had provided confidential information to the Commission. Most of my work there was on the various big cases regarding Google which were going on. When the stage was over, I was offered a short-term contract for the rest of the year to continue working in the office. I think that the time spent in Brussels (as well as being a lot of fun!) really helped me to be a better pupil and then a better barrister.

The pupillage experience

As I mentioned previously, it was our application process which helped me realise that I wanted to come here.

Our pupillage programme started with three relatively long stints (October to Christmas with my first supervisor, and just over a month with the next two supervisors). During the course of this roughly six months, I did a mixture of advisory and contentious work across the broad range of taxes and in various courts and tribunals (the First-tier and Upper Tribunals, the High Court (both in relation to judicial review and actions for professional negligence), the Court of Appeal, the CJEU (although sadly no trip to Luxembourg)). I received feedback on my work as I went along and at the end of the time with each supervisor. It was made clear that the particular focus of the first six, and especially the first 3-month rotation, was on learning rather than assessment. In the second six, the pace accelerated, spending first two weeks with each supervisor and then one week with some of the senior silks in chambers. My co-pupil and I rotated through the same supervisors, and we had three moots in our second six — one in April, and another in July, and then a final one at the very end of September with a pupil at another tax set. The tenancy decision was made in mid-July, and we both got taken on as tenants. We never felt like we were in competition with each other, and as a chambers we have since amended our pupillage policy to make it clear that pupils are only assessed on their own merits (and not by reference to other pupils or to the perceived short-term need for tenants etc).

After the decision, and some holiday, our supervisors focused on making sure that we had filled any gaps in our pupillage checklists. At the very end of pupillage, I started work on some cases that I would continue working on as a new tenant.

The transition from pupil to tenant

My co-pupil and I were one of the first years of new tenants to benefit from a formal mentoring scheme – one of my main supervisors was appointed as a designated person to go to with any concerns or questions. In addition to our mentors, we had a panel of senior members with different specialties to whom we were also encouraged to go and seek help and advice. One thing which I had been concerned about was the move from the regular payments of my pupillage award to getting paid for work done, and whether there would be a cash flow gap. However, Chambers provides a cash flow scheme for the first year of tenancy to ensure that each month we received the equivalent of the pupillage award payment.

It was exciting to start to have opinions and skeleton arguments go out in my own name. In some ways, things were easier because whereas when we were pupils any help could only come from our supervisors, as tenants we could ask all the other juniors as well as our panel/mentors for help with both practical questions (what do you call a High Court Judge when they’re sitting in the Upper Tribunal?) and technical ones (has anyone thought about section X before?).

What is your practice like now?

My practice is made up of a mix between litigation (most of which is currently led) and advisory work (generally solo). Much of my advisory work focuses on the ‘big events’ in people’s lives – purchases/sale of houses, sale of businesses, and death (both people preparing their wills and people whose relatives have died) – each of these points can raise important tax questions. Another important part relates to people who are facing HMRC investigation or HMRC have already indicated that they don’t agree with their analysis so far. My litigation work varies from major led corporate tax cases with tens of millions of pounds at stake to penalties which are significant in the context of a business but may amount to some thirty thousand pounds. I am generally in court approximately every few weeks, and my cases have tended to last up to two weeks. I attempt to work relatively standard ‘business’ hours as both a matter of discipline and to allow for some flexibility when relatively short deadlines land unpredictably (in particular dealing with judgments). This is generally easier to maintain in relation to advisory work than with litigation and court deadlines/hearing preparation. I’ve been lucky to get to do some of my own advocacy since the beginning of tenancy, appearing in the Upper Tribunal on my own within my first six months of tenancy, as well as in the FTT and the County Court.

What is the culture of chambers?

Chambers occupies three early-18th Century buildings on Bedford Row and the modern mews building behind it. This is close to the excellent lunch options on Red Lion Street and Lamb’s Conduit Street – lunches in small (or sometimes large) groups there or eaten in Gray’s Inn Walks are a frequent occurrence — as too are trips to one of the Inns for (most frequently) fish and chips. On a monthly basis, the social committee arranges for a table or tables to be booked in one of the Inns for lunch with both members and staff, and for an afternoon tea in chambers with tea, coffee, cake and drinks, again this is with everyone in chambers, not just the barristers. We also have chambers coffee three times a week – an opportunity to discuss tax questions with the other members of chambers. During lockdown, our social events changed to include remote painting, playing Among Us, a video tour of the Frick Collection in New York, and a virtual cheese tasting.

Colleagues are very willing to listen to and help with questions. The clerks and other support staff are always excellent — as a sounding board and support structure as well as e.g. finding work and negotiating fees. There are very transparent procedures relating both to opportunities for work and for marketing which avoids what I understand could be a concern elsewhere. In summary, I would say that we are collaborative and friendly.

Top tips for those wanting to become a barrister/secure a pupillage at your chambers

(1) Read the questions on the form carefully. The markers want you to do well but will generally be marking against a rubric. Answers which don’t answer the question are unlikely to be able to be highly marked (e.g. if you’re asked “tell me about a time when”, it is unlikely to be successful simply to list occasions rather than to explain a single occasion fully).

(2) Try to enjoy the process. If you find the questions you are asked interesting, and you enjoy discussing the answers with the panel, you are likely to come across much better.

(3) Be willing to try areas of law that you have not experienced much or at all when studying law.

(4) Have a back-up plan. The numbers for becoming a barrister are very difficult and every year very good applicants don’t get pupillage (and some get pupillage and don’t get tenancy). There are some 300-500 new pupils a year but each set is likely only to have a relatively small number of pupils, and to interview in their final rounds only a slightly larger number of candidates (many of whom will be in the final rounds of several places). This both means trying to identify something hopefully enjoyable and productive to do in semi-gap years if you either delay doing bar school or have a spare year after that, and thinking about alternative options more broadly.

I would also encourage any potential pupils out there that have an interest in Chancery/Commercial work to consider a mini at a tax set.