Checkprice (UK) Limited (in administration) v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 1 December 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 623 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
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: medium
This appeal concerned whether 119 duty-suspended lorry loads despatched by Checkprice to MTM in Calais actually arrived, which would extinguish the Appellant’s liability for Excise Duty and VAT. The Tribunal, on balance of probabilities, found the Appellant failed to prove delivery, accepted contemporaneous Eurotunnel scan and other evidence supporting HMRC’s "borrowed loads" outward‑diversion theory, and dismissed the appeal. HMRC was awarded costs subject to a 56‑day opportunity for representations.
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
Where contemporaneous documentary and electronic scan/tachograph evidence indicates outbound tractors crossed the Channel empty and the same tractors later appeared at the claimed destination carrying matching loads, a consignor may fail to discharge the burden of proving duty‑suspended goods were delivered; receipted copy 3 AADs are strong evidence of delivery but can be displaced by independent contemporaneous evidence such as scans showing empties and inconsistent transport/payment patterns.
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 noted that poor or incomplete commercial due diligence (eg reliance on cash payments and copied identity documents) is relevant to the consignor’s credibility though not by itself determinative; it also regretted loss/deletion of potentially relevant third‑party electronic records (Eurotunnel secondary data), observing that such loss hinders but does not automatically overturn available contemporaneous evidence.
Warning
Some evidence is incomplete or deleted (Eurotunnel secondary data); several key witnesses did not give oral evidence, making inferences necessary. Some evidence was incomplete or deleted and several key witnesses did not give oral evidence, requiring inferences from the available records.