Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tribunal refused an application to admit a late appeal against cancellation of registration, finding no exceptional circumstances to extend time.
The Upper Tribunal refused reconsideration of permission to appeal in a tax dispute, holding there was no arguable error in the FTT’s treatment of an HMRC barring application.
The Upper Tribunal refused Mr Wardle’s application for a protective costs order in HMRC’s appeal, finding no real public interest and no basis for an appeal costs order.
The Upper Tribunal found the University of Exeter in contempt for 14 months of non-compliance with a disclosure order and imposed a £15,000 fine plus publication.
The breaches of tribunal directions, including two Unless Orders, were serious and significant. No good reasons for the breaches were provided. On balance, the Applicant received all relevant communications and failed to comply or make proactive enquiries. The prejudice to the Respondents and public interest in finality of litigation outweighs prejudice to the Applicant. Statutory time limits and compliance with tribunal orders must be respected. Application for reinstatement is refused.
Source excerpt
Although Mr Sagar acted unreasonably to a limited extent in persisting with the appeal after HMRC clarified its position and in his uncooperative approach to Tribunal directions, the unreasonable conduct was minor and did not warrant an award of costs. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to refuse the costs application, weighing the limited impact of the unreasonable conduct and the context of the proceedings.
Source excerpt
The Upper Tribunal held that a school and its governing body could be named in published SEND discrimination decisions, while the child and other identifying details remained protected.
The Upper Tribunal held that Ms Prestage was qualified as an expert, but her close involvement in the file review process made her conflicted and her report unfair as expert evidence.
The Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal on one jurisdictional ground about reinstating a withdrawn tax appeal, but refused permission on all other grounds.
The 17-day delay in filing a valid notice of appeal was not serious or significant in the circumstances; the reasons for the delay, while not good, were not egregious; considering all circumstances and applying the Medpro approach, permission to make a late appeal should be granted as there is no real prejudice to the respondent and refusal would be terminal for the appellant's statutory appeal rights.
Source excerpt
Explore more
