Paul Tomas v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 22 December 2023

Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 15 (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 Tribunal refused Mr Tomas permission to bring a late appeal against HICBC assessments and failure-to-notify penalties after finding his Tribunal appeal was nearly four months out of time. The Tribunal rejected his explanation that he believed an appeal was already in train as vague and outweighed by clear written appeal notices and concluded the balance of factors favoured refusal. The decision records the statutory provisions, parties' arguments, and notes the right to seek permission to appeal the Tribunal's decision.

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 late appeal should be refused where the delay is serious and significant and the applicant’s explanation for the delay is vague, particularly when the respondent’s written notices clearly set out appeal rights and time limits; in exercising the discretion the Tribunal must balance the length and reason for the delay, prejudice, and the limited merits of the substantive appeal without conducting a detailed merits 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 judgment suggests (obiter) that HMRC concessionary practices (such as pandemic concessions) do not extend statutory time limits and cannot cure an otherwise late statutory appeal, and that shortage of funds or self-representation will not generally excuse non-compliance with appeal time limits; telephone calls do not ordinarily constitute an appeal.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML