Pierhead Purchasing Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 18 March 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 122 (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
Pierhead appealed HMRC's refusal of two excise drawback claims for export of beer, arguing it had given the required two clear business days' notice and had shown duty had been paid. The Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the goods left the bonded warehouse on 18 April 2008 so the required two clear business days after HMRC's receipt of notice were not satisfied, and that Pierhead failed to provide the documentary audit trail required by Notice 207/regulation 10; HMRC's refusal and its decision not to waive strict compliance were not unreasonable, so the appeal was dismissed.
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 binding core of the decision is that compliance with regulation 8(2)(d) requires goods to be available for inspection for the full period of two clear business days following HMRC’s receipt of notice, regardless of whether an inspection in fact takes place, and that claimants must meet Notice 207/regulation 10 documentary requirements to evidence payment of duty; later, unspecific supplier letters that do not create the necessary audit trail are insufficient.
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 it would generally be inappropriate to construe "business days" as limited to normal office hours for the two-day availability requirement, and commented that HMRC should take care in admitting late witness statements and in conducting departmental reviews within statutory time limits—observations that did not affect the outcome.