Gary Russell v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 11 March 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 367 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

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: high

This case concerns HMRC's application to strike out Gary Russell's appeal against a 19 September 2024 Simple Assessment for underpaid income tax. The Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to entertain the appellant's grounds (lack of knowledge of liability, inability to pay, HMRC delay/negligence) because he did not dispute the assessed quantum or its calculation under the Income Tax Acts, and therefore struck out the appeal under Rule 8(2). The Tribunal also concluded there was no realistic prospect of success under Rule 8(3)(c) for the same reason.

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

A First-tier Tribunal hearing an appeal against a validly made Simple Assessment is limited to determining whether the amount assessed is correct as a matter of law under the relevant tax statutes; absent statutory provision, complaints such as lack of knowledge of liability, inability to pay, or administrative delay are not bases on which the Tribunal may reduce or set aside a Simple Assessment.

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 noted that it should read an appellant's notice and any representations holistically—particularly for litigants in person—when identifying the substance of an appeal, and that the Tribunal should avoid conducting a "mini-trial" on a strike-out application while still taking account of available evidence and what could reasonably be expected at a hearing.

Warning

The chunk contains duplicated and partially garbled text and repeated passages, which made extraction of a single coherent narrative more difficult. The provided notes contain duplicated and partially garbled text and may be materially incomplete.