Colin Humphreys v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 2 February 2011
Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 98 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
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 an appeal against a 5% late payment surcharge following a paper self-assessment posted on 15 January 2010. The tribunal found HMRC had materially misled the appellant by promoting online filing without disclosing that his return required specialist third‑party software and that local staff failed to warn him he would need to calculate tax himself. The tribunal accepted the appellant’s evidence, held that misleading information from HMRC amounted to a "reasonable excuse" for late payment, rejected the requirement that "reasonable excuse" must be an exceptional circumstance, and allowed the appeal (surcharge set aside).
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
The tribunal’s ratio is that misleading or inaccurate information provided by the tax authority can constitute a "reasonable excuse" for late payment of tax, and the ordinary meaning of "reasonable excuse" should be applied rather than requiring proof of exceptional circumstances.
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 suggested it is unreasonable to expect taxpayers to procure and rely on third‑party software in order to use an authority’s advertised online service, and noted that tax calculations by online software may be complex and not straightforward for an average taxpayer to perform manually.