Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:	2014 UKUT 182 AAC
Reported Number:
File Number:	CSTC 224 2014
Appellant:	AP
Respondent:	HMRC (TC)
Judge/Commissioner:	Judge D. J. May Q.C.
Date Of Decision:	26/03/2014
Date Added:	15/05/2014
Main Category:	Tribunal procedure and practice (including UT)
Main Subcategory:	tribunal jurisdiction
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes:	Reported as [2014] AACR 37. Tribunal procedure and practice – tribunal jurisdiction – whether section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 requiring production of a document extends to a submission In November 2012 the appellant appealed against a decision of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) that she was not entitled to tax credits (TC). Despite a number of requests and reminders HMRC failed to provide a submission to support its decision. The case was referred to the First-tier Tribunal (F-tT) and on 18 October 2013 it directed HMRC to produce a submission within 21 days. HMRC failed to do so and the F-tT judge directed HMRC to ensure an officer attended an oral hearing or he would consider referring the matter to the Upper Tribunal (UT). No officer attended nor was a submission provided. The case was then referred by the Regional Tribunal Judge to the UT which was asked to consider exercising its powers for contempt of court under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and rule 7(3)(e) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008. Held, declining the reference, that: the 2008 Rules make a distinction between a document and a submission: while rule 5 refers to documents and submissions, rule 7 does not encompass the making of a submission and rule 24 makes a clear distinction between a document and a submission. HMRC’s failure was to obtemper a direction to produce a submission in the appeal and that failure was not encompassed within the powers of the F-tT to make a reference to the UT in terms of rule 7(3) (paragraphs 9 to 10). The judge remitted the matter to the F-tT to decide how to proceed.
Decision(s) to Download:	[2014] AACR 37bv.doc