Mark Mitchell & Anor. v The Commissioners for HMRC

Mark Mitchell & Anor. v The Commissioners for HMRC

HMRC has statutory power under section 18(2)(a) and (c) CRCA to disclose confidential taxpayer documents to another party in tax litigation without FTT authorisation. The FTT lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate HMRC's exercise of these powers; any challenge must be by judicial review. The FTT erred by conflating disclosure with admissibility and by restricting disclosure based solely on relevance to pleaded issues. Fairness may require broader disclosure in complex tax appeals.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Mark Mitchell; Appellant: Paul Bell; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Documents, Taxpayer Confidentiality, Case Management Powers, Admissibility of Evidence
Tax Law Civil Procedure Disclosure of Documents Taxpayer Confidentiality Case Management Powers Admissibility of Evidence

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Mitchell

Appellant/respondent

Paul Bell

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC can disclose confidential taxpayer documents to another party in tax litigation under section 18 CRCA
  2. 2 Whether the FTT has jurisdiction to adjudicate HMRC's exercise of statutory disclosure powers
  3. 3 Whether relevance/admissibility governs disclosure in FTT proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

HMRC has statutory power under section 18(2)(a) and (c) CRCA to disclose confidential taxpayer documents to another party in tax litigation without FTT authorisation. The FTT lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate HMRC's exercise of these powers; any challenge must be by judicial review. The FTT erred by conflating disclosure with admissibility and by restricting disclosure based solely on relevance to pleaded issues. Fairness may require broader disclosure in complex tax appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Ftt and UT decisions set aside to the extent they refused HMRC's application for disclosure of Level 2B and Level 4 documents.
  • No order substituted for the FTT's refusal of those parts of HMRC's application under appeal.