United Wholesale Grocers Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 2 September 2025

Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 1066 (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

This appeal concerns HMRC assessments for unpaid excise duty and penalties against United Wholesale Grocers Ltd (UWG) for 2012–13 and UWG’s request that HMRC search for and disclose documents bearing on whether an earlier duty point occurred. The Tribunal granted a tailored disclosure order directing HMRC to search and disclose documents (beyond standard Rule 27 lists) that support UWG’s case or are adverse to HMRC, and to provide a CPR-style disclosure statement and specified documents by set deadlines. The order was limited in scope and time and replaced earlier case-management directions.

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 HMRC, “as a body”, holds documents potentially sufficient to establish an earlier excise duty point, it is compatible with the Tribunal’s overriding objective and fair adjudication for the Tribunal to direct HMRC to search for and disclose relevant documents beyond standard Rule 27 disclosure; the CPR may be used as a guide to the scope of such disclosure (e.g. as if CPR 31.6/31.7 applied), subject to limits set by the Tribunal Rules and proportionality.

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 suggests (obiter) that it is not necessarily disproportionate for HMRC to be required to search multiple file locations within the department where relevant material may be held, and that an appellant’s failure to pursue alternative remedies (such as judicial review) does not automatically preclude a Tribunal disclosure application when HMRC holds relevant material.