High Court says investors should have gotten their ‘own advice’ instead of relying on top QC’s opinion memo

A High Court judge has said a leading barrister cannot be held responsible for any losses suffered by those invested in film financing schemes, with a view to gaining tax benefits, after reading the QC’s advice in memos used to advertise the investment schemes.

Mr Justice Zacaroli said Andrew Thronhill QC cannot be held responsible for any losses, after the top QC provided legal opinions used to advertise film financing schemes.

The ruling comes after the schemes, which were advertised to investors as vehicles for achieving tax benefits in the 2000s, were shut down by HMRC, after those who invested their money suffered “dire financial consequences.” 

Thornhill’s opinions had been used in an “informational memorandum” to advertise the film financing schemes, on the grounds that investing in such schemes would provide tax benefits. 

However, the judge ruled that Thornhill, who had not been hired to work for any of those who invested in the film financing schemes, had no duty of care for those who lost money.

Instead, the judge argued that investors should have sought out their “own advice” before investing in the schemes, which saw wealthy individuals inject millions into film such as “Escape to Victory”. 

The judge argued that those investing in the film financing schemes, which required minimum investments of £250,000, should have had the resources to obtain their own professional advice.

“These Schemes were not directed at people of modest means; they were directed at high net worth individuals (HNWIs) who had access to their own advice,” the judge said.