NCM 2000 Ltd, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue & Customs [2015] EWHC 1342 (Admin) (22 May 2015)

NCM 2000 Ltd, R (on the application of) v HM Revenue & Customs [2015] EWHC 1342 (Admin) (22 May 2015)

The application for permission to bring a claim for judicial review was refused because the claim was filed out of time, as the grounds arose at the latest on receipt of the letter dated 17 May 2012, and no good reason for the delay was provided. Additionally, an adequate alternative remedy was available to the applicant via the Adjudicator and Parliamentary Ombudsman, making judicial review inappropriate.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1342 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: NCM 2000 Ltd; Defendant/respondent: The Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Permission to Bring Claim for Judicial Review
Outcome
Permission to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, VAT, Compensation for Economic Loss, Limitation Periods, Alternative Remedies
Administrative Law Tax Law Judicial Review VAT Compensation for Economic Loss Limitation Periods Alternative Remedies

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NCM 2000 Ltd

Claimant/applicant

The Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Permission to Bring Claim for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for judicial review was filed within the required time limits
  2. 2 Whether there was an adequate alternative remedy available to the applicant
  3. 3 Whether HMRC's refusal to pay compensation for economic loss was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to bring a claim for judicial review was refused because the claim was filed out of time, as the grounds arose at the latest on receipt of the letter dated 17 May 2012, and no good reason for the delay was provided. Additionally, an adequate alternative remedy was available to the applicant via the Adjudicator and Parliamentary Ombudsman, making judicial review inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Permission to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the Acknowledgment of Service and Summary Grounds of Defence, summarily assessed at £2,522