The barrister, in accordance with Bar requirements, acquired and wore particular items of clothing, both in court and to and from the court to her chambers. The clothing was such as might be used for ordinary civilian purposes but she did not wear such clothing away from work. The barrister preferring to wear coloured clothes of a more adventurous style of which she had an ample supply. The wearing of her court clothes necessarily spared her private wardrobe from wear and tear but this was not a consideration in her mind when she bought the court clothes, any more than was the preservation of her warmth and decency. The barrister bought the court clothes only because she would not have been permitted to appear in court if she had not worn them.
The Inspector disallowed the barrister’s expenditure. It was contended on the barrister’s behalf that the test whether her expenditure was ‘ wholly and exclusively’ incurred ‘ for the purpose of her profession’ was subjective. Moreover the barrister’s expenditure did not cease to be wholly and exclusively incurred for such purposes simply because in addition to achieving a professional purpose it achieved an additional incidental effect.