Palmiero v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 922 (TC) (29 September 2014)

Palmiero v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 922 (TC) (29 September 2014)

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay was excessive, no good reason for the delay was demonstrated, the conditions in Rule 38(2) were not satisfied, and it was not in the interests of justice to grant the application. The underlying set-aside application was extremely weak and did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] UKFTT 922 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Assuntino Palmiero; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
29 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Set Aside of Tribunal Decision / Decision on Application for Extension of Time and Set Aside
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Set Aside Applications, Tribunal Procedure, New Evidence, Procedural Irregularity
Tax Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Set Aside Applications Tribunal Procedure New Evidence Procedural Irregularity

Source-derived case record

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Assuntino Palmiero

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Set Aside of Tribunal Decision / Decision on Application for Extension of Time and Set Aside

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should grant an extension of time to apply for set-aside of its earlier decision
  2. 2 Whether the set-aside application meets the conditions under Rule 38 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules
  3. 3 Whether new evidence justifies setting aside the original decision

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay was excessive, no good reason for the delay was demonstrated, the conditions in Rule 38(2) were not satisfied, and it was not in the interests of justice to grant the application. The underlying set-aside application was extremely weak and did not justify reopening the matter.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused

Orders

  • The application for an extension of time for making the set-aside application is refused.