Kearney Transport Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 18 September 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1357 (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
Kearney Transport Ltd appealed HMRC assessments and wrongdoing penalties after beer found on two of its vehicles was seized. The Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that Kearney was the person "holding" the excise goods because the vehicles and drivers were its resources and the drivers had received instructions from a company director, and it upheld the duty assessments and penalties in full. The appeal was dismissed.
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: medium
The Tribunal treated evidence that a company owned/controlled the vehicles and employed the drivers, together with evidence that those drivers took instructions from a company director, as sufficient to establish that the company was "holding" excise goods for the purposes of regulation 10 HMDP Regulations; conversely, failure to produce credible, consistent evidence showing a bona fide transfer of responsibility to a third party weighed against the appellant.
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 Tribunal observed (obiter) that a director being on holiday does not by itself show the company had not given instructions or retained responsibility, and that speculative points (e.g. about trailer type or presumed driver knowledge) are insufficient without positive evidence.