Christine Noble v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 15 October 2019

Neutral citation: Neutral citation not available

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 case concerns Christine Noble's out-of-time appeals against HMRC Schedule 55 late self-assessment penalties where she notified HMRC of appeals well beyond the statutory deadline. The Tribunal applied the Denton three-stage test, found the delay serious and unexplained, refused permission to pursue the out-of-time appeals, and struck the appeals out without deciding substantive merits. The appellant retains rights to seek full written findings and to appeal within the prescribed time.

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

From the judgment, the Tribunal treated long, unexplained delays in notifying appeals as sufficient to refuse permission to pursue an out‑of‑time appeal, applying the Denton three-stage approach (assessing seriousness of the breach, reasons for it, and all the circumstances including prejudice). Thus, where there is a significant unexplained delay in complying with statutory appeal time limits, refusal of permission can be 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 notes indicate obiter observations that a Tribunal may form a preliminary view on the substantive merits when exercising its discretion over permission, but that it need not decide substantive issues where refusal is founded on delay; and a general remark that parties should be able to rely on time limits to provide finality, subject to safeguards.

Warning

- none

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML