Cormac Construction Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 17 December 2009
Neutral citation: [2009] UKFTT 380 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
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: medium
This appeal concerned HMRC's cancellation of Cormac Construction Ltd's gross payment status after eight late PAYE payments in the 12‑month review period. The Tribunal found some of the late payments excused by the company officer's significant childcare and illness pressures but rejected a defence based on a mistaken belief about the due date. The Tribunal accepted an interpretation of Regulation 32 that effectively allows up to three late payments in the review period, so Cormac met the compliance test and the appeal was allowed.
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 decision indicates that (1) a mistaken belief about the PAYE due date (thinking it was the 28th rather than the 22nd) is not a reasonable excuse, (2) personal circumstances of the person responsible for payments (notably severe childcare and related illness pressures) can amount to a reasonable excuse for some late payments, and (3) Regulation 32 may be interpreted so that up to three late payments in the 12‑month review period do not defeat compliance.
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 emphasised that whether a reasonable excuse exists is fact‑specific and must be assessed in light of all circumstances; it also noted that HMRC may accept compassionate explanations for some late payments while contesting others.