HM Inspector of Taxes v Vicky Construction Ltd [2002] EWHC 2659 (Ch) (06 December 2002)

HM Inspector of Taxes v Vicky Construction Ltd [2002] EWHC 2659 (Ch) (06 December 2002)

The true and only reasonable conclusion on the undisputed facts is that Vicky's repeated and significant late payments of PAYE were not 'minor and technical' within the meaning of section 565(4) ICTA 1988, and the Commissioners' contrary determination was an error of law. The refusal to issue a certificate did not infringe Vicky's convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 2659 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant: Shaw (HMIT); Respondent: Vicky Construction Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Appeal From General Commissioners to High Court
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Subcontractors' Tax Certificates, PAYE Compliance, Statutory Interpretation, Human Rights Act Application, Administrative Law
Tax Law Public Law Subcontractors' Tax Certificates PAYE Compliance Statutory Interpretation Human Rights Act Application Administrative Law

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 18
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shaw (HMIT)

Appellant

Vicky Construction Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Appeal From General Commissioners to High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether repeated late payment of PAYE by Vicky Construction Ltd constitutes 'minor and technical' non-compliance under section 565(4) ICTA 1988
  2. 2 Whether the General Commissioners erred in law in allowing Vicky's appeal and directing the issue of a certificate
  3. 3 Whether refusal to issue a certificate infringes Vicky's rights under the Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The true and only reasonable conclusion on the undisputed facts is that Vicky's repeated and significant late payments of PAYE were not 'minor and technical' within the meaning of section 565(4) ICTA 1988, and the Commissioners' contrary determination was an error of law. The refusal to issue a certificate did not infringe Vicky's convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Determination of the General Commissioners set aside
  • No order affecting any current certificate held by Vicky Construction Ltd