Nigel Barklem v The Commissioners for HMRC

Nigel Barklem v The Commissioners for HMRC

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because challenges to s.28B(4) notices must be brought by judicial review, not by Part 7 claim; in any event, the s.54 Agreement upheld the closure notices without variation, and s.28B(4) amendments to partners’ tax returns are mandatory, even if the partnership is determined not to exist.

Parties
Claimant: Nigel Barklem; Defendants: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process; summary judgment application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Partnership Tax Schemes, Abuse of Process, Declaratory Relief, Closure Notices, Summary Judgment, Judicial Review, Amendment of Tax Returns
Tax Law Civil Procedure Partnership Tax Schemes Abuse of Process Declaratory Relief Closure Notices Summary Judgment Judicial Review +1 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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Barklem

Claimant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC had power to amend partners’ tax returns under s.28B(4) TMA when the partnership was determined not to exist
  2. 2 Whether a Part 7 claim for declaratory relief challenging s.28B(4) notices is an abuse of process
  3. 3 Effect of s.54 TMA settlement agreement on closure notices and subsequent amendments

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because challenges to s.28B(4) notices must be brought by judicial review, not by Part 7 claim; in any event, the s.54 Agreement upheld the closure notices without variation, and s.28B(4) amendments to partners’ tax returns are mandatory, even if the partnership is determined not to exist.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process; summary judgment application dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimant’s Part 7 claim struck out.
  • Claimant’s application for summary judgment dismissed.