Douglas Lambourne v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 8 December 2022

Neutral citation: [2022] UKFTT 466 (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 case concerns Mr Lambourne’s challenge to HMRC’s refusal to repay sums under the Disguised Remuneration Voluntary Repayment Scheme after a prior settlement. The First‑Tier Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because neither Finance Act 2020 nor the Scheme confers a statutory right of appeal to the Tribunal, and struck the appeal out. The Tribunal noted judicial review as the alternative remedy and urged HMRC to consider the facts before issuing termination notices under the Scheme.

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’s ratio is that the First‑Tier Tribunal’s jurisdiction is entirely statutory and, in the absence of an express statutory right of appeal (here in FA 2020 or the Scheme), a taxpayer cannot appeal HMRC repayment decisions under the Scheme to the First‑Tier Tribunal; accordingly the appeal was struck out for want of jurisdiction under Rule 8(2)(a).

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 suggested, obiter, that Parliament might consider conferring a right of appeal to the First‑Tier Tax Tribunal for Scheme decisions to avoid practical barriers to justice posed by reliance on judicial review. It also commented that HMRC should consider at the time of terminating a Scheme application whether it had a realistic prospect of recovering the amounts from the employer.

Warning

- The chunk contains repeated passages but the material is interpretable; none

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML