Colaingrove Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 27 November 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 1065 (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
Colaingrove sought an order under paragraph 7(3) of the Tribunal Transitional and Savings (Taxes) Order to preserve pre-1 April 2009 costs rules (Rule 29) for 24 joined appeals after being awarded additional interest. The Tribunal held it had discretion to direct that Rule 29 apply but refused to exercise that discretion here because of delay, the timing of the application and respect for the post-2009 costs regime (Rule 10). The Tribunal also held it had no power to re-categorise disposed appeals as complex and, even if it did, would have refused to do so as an abuse of process. Colaingrove’s costs claim was therefore denied.
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 recognised a discretionary power under paragraph 7(3) TTFO to preserve pre-1 April 2009 costs rules for appeals commenced before that date, but that discretion must be exercised consistently with the post-2009 costs policy (Rule 10) and relevant factors such as complexity, costs incurred pre-2009, the timing of any paragraph 7(3) application and the parties’ conduct; delay and a “wait and see” approach after proceedings resume or are activated are strong reasons to refuse to disapply Rule 10.
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 indicated (obiter) that a stay of proceedings may excuse immediate paragraph 7(3) action while the stay subsists, but once proceedings are activated (for example by an application), a party is expected to apply promptly; merely stating an intention to claim under the pre-2009 regime without timely paragraph 7(3) action will not preserve a right to costs under that regime.