The case in question seems a reasonable and fair outcome, from what we know.
However, i can't get my head around the final paragraph, letting three people off paying what has been determined to be due to HMRC simply because they and their advisors acted in "good faith." And everyone else acted in "bad faith"?
And yet Christa Akroyd had to pay up, despite her claims that she merely did what the BBC told her to, gave her no option to do otherwise.
Odd. Decidedly odd.