On 5 February 2026 Quinn J in the High Court delivered his judgment on this case stated from the Tax Appeals Commission (TAC) concerning the application of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) contained in s811 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (TCA 1997). The case involved arrangements entered into by Messrs Hegarty, Geary and Ward with Schroders bank. The arrangements concerned gilt forward contracts (GFCs) and foreign exchange contracts for difference (FXCDs). The Appeal Commissioner had determined the appeal in favour of the Revenue Commissioners, but Quinn J found that there were a number of errors of law in the determination and that, consequently, it could not stand. Although s811 has been replaced by s811C for transactions entered into since 2014, many of the considerations regarding how to identify a “tax avoidance transaction” remain very similar in the present legislation. As the High Court judgment in the case runs to 77 pages, I attempt to distil and consider briefly the principal issues below.