Revenue And Customs v Labeikis & Ors [2024] EWHC 2009 (KB) (07 August 2024)

Revenue And Customs v Labeikis & Ors [2024] EWHC 2009 (KB) (07 August 2024)

The Part 8 claims are public law challenges to the validity of tax legislation and should have been brought by way of judicial review under CPR Part 54. Allowing them to proceed under Part 8 is an abuse of process per the exclusivity principle in O'Reilly v Mackman. The statutory appeal process before the Tribunal is the exclusive remedy for challenging HMRC decisions (Autologic principle). The principle of effectiveness under EU law does not require the court to allow these claims to proceed outside the established statutory and procedural framework. The claims should be struck out, not stayed.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2009 (KB)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HIS MAJESTY'S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS; Respondent/claimant: DONATAS LABEIKIS and others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Order Refusing to Strike Out Claims; High Court King's Bench Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Part 8 claims struck out as abuse of process.
Legal Topics
Loan Charge, Disguised Remuneration Schemes, Abuse of Process, Judicial Review, Declaratory Relief, Compatibility With EU Law, Compatibility With ECHR, Exclusivity Principle, Effectiveness Principle, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Francovich Damages
Tax Law Civil Procedure Public Law European Union Law Human Rights Law Loan Charge Disguised Remuneration Schemes Abuse of Process +8 more

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HIS MAJESTY'S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS

Appellant/defendant

DONATAS LABEIKIS and others

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Order Refusing to Strike Out Claims; High Court King's Bench Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Part 8 claims challenging the Loan Charge legislation should be struck out as an abuse of process under the exclusivity principle in O'Reilly v Mackman
  2. 2 Whether the statutory appeal process before the Tribunal is the exclusive remedy (Autologic principle)
  3. 3 Whether the principle of effectiveness under EU law requires the court to allow the claims to proceed outside judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The Part 8 claims are public law challenges to the validity of tax legislation and should have been brought by way of judicial review under CPR Part 54. Allowing them to proceed under Part 8 is an abuse of process per the exclusivity principle in O'Reilly v Mackman. The statutory appeal process before the Tribunal is the exclusive remedy for challenging HMRC decisions (Autologic principle). The principle of effectiveness under EU law does not require the court to allow these claims to proceed outside the established statutory and procedural framework. The claims should be struck out, not stayed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Part 8 claims struck out as abuse of process.

Orders

  • Order of Master Dagnall staying the Part 8 claims set aside.
  • Part 8 claims by Respondents struck out as abuse of process.