Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 13 August 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 748 (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 case concerns Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust's appeal seeking repayment of VAT paid on locum doctors and HMRC's application to strike the appeal out for want of jurisdiction. The Tribunal held that HMRC's refusal to accept the Trust's section 80 repayment claim was not an appealable "decision" under section 83 VATA, so the First-tier Tribunal lacked jurisdiction and the appeal was struck out. Alternatively, the Tribunal found that if the appeal were against the Isle of Wight decision it was plainly out of time and would not be admitted. Parties have 56 days to apply for permission to appeal.
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 treats a refusal by HMRC to accept a recipient's repayment claim under section 80 as distinct from a decision on the VAT chargeable on a supply and therefore not an appealable matter under section 83 VATA; accordingly, the FTT has no jurisdiction to hear appeals of that refusal. The Tribunal also applied the statutory time limits: an appeal must be brought within the period in section 83G(1), and where an appeal is late the notice must seek permission under rule 20(4) or the Tribunal must not admit the appeal.
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 that correspondence stating HMRC will not entertain a section 80 claim does not amount to a decision on the VAT treatment of the underlying supply, and that references in a notice of appeal to another FTT decision do not, without clearer pleading, incorporate that decision as the decision being appealed. These points were treated as supplementary observations rather than binding ratio.