Wood Group Engineering (North Sea) Ltd v The Commissioners For HMRC
Decision date: 12 January 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1607 (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 concerned whether Wood Group Engineering (North Sea) Ltd (WGENS) was a "host employer" under paragraph 9 Schedule 3 to the 1978 Regulations for 6 April 2011–5 April 2013, attracting secondary Class 1 NICs assessed by HMRC. The Tribunal held that WGOS (Guernsey) was a foreign employer whose employees’ personal service was made available to and rendered for the purposes of WGENS’ business, so WGENS was properly assessed as the host employer and the appeal was dismissed. The assessed NICs (excluding interest) were £18,134,036.
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 applied a purposive construction of the Host Employer Provision (HEP): the statutory test asks whether personal service was made available to and rendered for the host employer’s business, and does not require a formal secondment or import employment-status tests; limited mechanisms by which a foreign employer requires employees to follow the UK host’s directions can suffice, and no requirement of broad, direct control or exclusivity was read into the HEP.
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 the reference to “a” host employer does not imply exclusivity or permit judicially reading in an apportionment mechanism; documentary evidence generally merits greater weight than faded witness recollection in long-past disputes; and comparable North Sea arrangements have previously been treated as falling within the HEP in FTT decisions.
Warning
Some duplication and repeated passages in the chunk; factual narrative and findings are reiterated. notes include some duplication and repeated passages and may be noisy.