Irene Clariscia Gill v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 5 October 2022
Neutral citation: [2022] UKFTT 368 (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
This FTT decision concerns Ms Irene Gill’s appeals against self-assessments, statutory interest and Schedule 55 late filing penalties for tax years 2008–09 to 2016–17. The tribunal struck out appeals relating to tax and statutory interest for 2008–09 to 2011–12 and 2013–14 (including a closure notice) as an abuse of process or for lack of jurisdiction, and refused to admit late appeals against late filing penalties for 2014–15 to 2016–17. The tribunal cited a prior 2015 FTT determination, absence of an appealable decision in respect of Ms Gill’s own 2013–14 self-assessment, lack of jurisdiction to challenge statutory interest, procedural failures and inordinate delay as reasons. Parties were given 56 days to apply for permission to 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: medium
The dispositive ratio is that the tribunal may strike out attempts to re-litigate matters conclusively determined by an earlier tribunal decision (where no appeal to a higher tribunal was pursued), that there is no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by a taxpayer against their own unamended self-assessment in the circumstances described, and that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction to overturn statutorily mandated interest where the statute plainly requires its payment.
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 contains supporting observations that failure to provide witness statements or to attend to give oral evidence, significant procedural non-compliance (poor bundling, very late skeleton arguments and late witness/summons applications), and representative failings ordinarily count against an appellant and may justify strike out or refusal to admit late appeals.