Gary Quillan v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 10 April 2025

Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 421 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: medium

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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

Mr Quillan appealed a closure notice assessing income under s.415(1) ITTOIA for 2018–19, based on an overdrawn director’s loan account following BOH’s liquidation. The Tribunal found there was neither a release nor a write‑off of the director’s loan balance because the liquidator expressly did not write it off and deliberately chose not to use formal write‑off/release procedures. The appeal was allowed and the closure notice set aside; the Tribunal did not decide timing issues.

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

Where a liquidator deliberately chooses not to follow available formal procedures to release or write off a debt, that deliberate choice indicates the debt has not been released or written off for the purposes of s.415(1) ITTOIA; the Tribunal will assess the liquidator’s actual actions and intentions rather than treating non‑pursuit alone as a write‑off.

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 indicated that HMRC guidance treating an unpursued debt as effectively written off is of limited assistance and should not supplant examination of the liquidator’s actual conduct; and that relying on the ordinary dictionary meaning of “written off” is of limited utility where formal liquidation procedures exist but were not used.