Laser Byte Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 9 July 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 616 (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
The case concerns whether Laser Byte’s director-employee, Mr Puttock, had a fixed reference salary for calculating Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) claims and whether a reported February 2020 pay increase to £2,000 was effective in that month or was a retrospective change made in March 2020. The First-tier Tribunal found Mr Puttock was not a fixed rate employee and that the £2,000 increase was decided and backdated in March 2020, so it was not payable in February and could not be taken into account for the CJRS reference salary. The Tribunal reduced HMRC’s assessment modestly and otherwise dismissed the company’s appeal.
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 held that RTI submissions are evidence of what an employer reported or believed but do not by themselves establish the factual truth of what was paid or payable; factual proof is required, and the burden of proof rests on the appellant to show a pay change was effective in the earlier period claimed.
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 observed that informal internal arrangements and a lack of contemporaneous documentation weaken a claimant’s case that a contractual entitlement to a fixed salary existed, and that treating an entitlement to a fixed “after-tax” net amount as satisfying the requirement for a contractual fixed salary is not accepted.