Sofia Lorenzo v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 4 July 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 588 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal challenged HMRC assessments seeking repayment of SEISS sums the appellant accepted she was not entitled to. The Tribunal decided the preliminary issue that Babe Aesthetics Ltd would not have qualified for CJRS in respect of the appellant because no qualifying employment costs (wages shown in PAYE/RTI) were incurred, there was no written furlough agreement, and there was no cessation of all work for at least 21 days; continuation (flexi) claims also required earlier qualifying claims. The appeal was dismissed and the assessments under paragraph 9 Schedule 16 stand.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
The Tribunal treated CJRS entitlement as dependent on (1) the employer having incurred qualifying employment costs evidenced in PAYE/RTI (i.e. wages paid), (2) a furlough instruction effecting cessation of all work for at least 21 days, and (3) retention of a written furlough agreement; further, flexi/continuation CJRS claims required that qualifying claims had been validly made under earlier Directions.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The judgment suggested (obiter) that general presumptions of regularity or inferences about a director’s conduct cannot substitute for the specific factual and documentary requirements for CJRS entitlement, and that if factual/legal entitlement to an alternative scheme cannot be established, wider jurisdictional or public law challenges to HMRC’s assessments need not be reached.