Paul Bryan v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 19 May 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 743 (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 appeal concerned Mr Paul Bryan’s third application under s.28 TMA for directions that HMRC issue closure notices for his 2017 and 2018 self-assessment enquiries. The tribunal found HMRC had reasonable grounds to continue enquiries because material matters (reconciliation of office and client account movements, disbursements, and work-in-progress calculations) remained unresolved. The application was dismissed and no direction to issue closure notices was made.

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 reasoned that a s.28 direction should be refused where HMRC can demonstrate outstanding, objectively justifiable enquiries that may affect tax liability and where further information is reasonably required; accordingly it was proper to refuse to direct closure until those issues are resolved. The tribunal also treated redacted client account records that do not disclose privileged communications as producible where necessary to reconcile turnover, disbursements and cashflows.

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 expressed that parties should seek to resolve remaining narrow issues cooperatively and noted the utility of alternative dispute resolution and negotiated settlement; it warned that directing closure when key facts remain unresolved risks unfairness and wasted appeals.