Christopher O'Brien v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 581 (TC) (13 September 2012)

Christopher O'Brien v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 581 (TC) (13 September 2012)

Repeated failure by the appellant to comply with Tribunal Directions, lack of meaningful cooperation, and absence of relevant documentation justified striking out the appeals under Rule 8(1) and Rule 8(3)(b), with no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2012] UKFTT 581
Parties
Appellant: Christopher O'Brien; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
13 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application in Tax Appeals / Application to Strike Out Conjoined Appeals Prior to Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Appeals struck out
Legal Topics
Income Tax, Corporation Tax, Penalties, Case Management, Compliance With Directions

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher O'Brien

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application in Tax Appeals / Application to Strike Out Conjoined Appeals Prior to Substantive Hearing

  1. 1 Whether failure to comply with Tribunal Directions warrants strike out under Tribunal Rules
  2. 2 Whether appellant had reasonable excuse for non-compliance
  3. 3 Whether appeals have realistic prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

Repeated failure by the appellant to comply with Tribunal Directions, lack of meaningful cooperation, and absence of relevant documentation justified striking out the appeals under Rule 8(1) and Rule 8(3)(b), with no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Appeals struck out

Orders

  • Appeals struck out under Rule 8(1) and Rule 8(3)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009
  • Right to apply for permission to appeal within 56 days pursuant to Rule 39