Charles Caton v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 9 May 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 374 (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 Mr Charles Caton's late application (about 3 years 8 months) for permission to appeal penalty assessments issued to him by HMRC on 12 April 2019 arising from his company's disposals. The tribunal applied the Martland three-stage test, found the delay serious and unjustified, rejected the appellant's key factual claim of a March 2019 telephone reassurance (preferring contemporaneous records), found no obvious strengths in the underlying appeal, and dismissed the application for permission.
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 the established Martland three-stage approach to permission for a late tax appeal (length of delay; reasons for default; overall evaluation including strength of case and prejudice) and relied on contemporaneous documentary and official records over later inconsistent witness recollection when assessing whether communications occurred and whether the delay was justified.
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 judgment observed that an unequivocal oral reassurance from an HMRC officer could, if reliably established and supported by contemporaneous evidence, constitute a cogent reason for delay; it also noted that HMRC's practice of recording significant telephone communications and seeking written submissions is a relevant factor when assessing disputed oral communications.