Clipper Group Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs (EXCISE DUTY APPEALS : Costs) [2016] UKFTT 712 (TC) (24 October 2016)

Clipper Group Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs (EXCISE DUTY APPEALS : Costs) [2016] UKFTT 712 (TC) (24 October 2016)

Notice for the purposes of rule 10(1)(c)(ii) is only received when the recipient is actually aware, or ought reasonably to be aware, of the notice in the circumstances. The mere inclusion of the notice in a large bundle, without drawing attention to it and where it is irrelevant to the immediate proceedings, does not constitute receipt of notice. Therefore, the Appellant did not receive notice until it was expressly made aware of the notice, and its opt-out request was within time.

Citation
[2016] UKFTT 712 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Clipper Group Holdings Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
24 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Excise Duty Appeal Costs Application / Post Withdrawal Costs Application After Withdrawal of Substantive Appeal
Outcome
Application for costs denied
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Costs Regime, Complex Case Allocation, Notice Requirements, Tribunal Procedure Rules
Tax Law Tribunal Procedure Excise Duty Costs Regime Complex Case Allocation Notice Requirements Tribunal Procedure Rules

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clipper Group Holdings Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Excise Duty Appeal Costs Application / Post Withdrawal Costs Application After Withdrawal of Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant received notice of complex case allocation for the purposes of rule 10(1)(c)(ii) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009
  2. 2 Whether receipt of a bundle containing the notice by Appellant's counsel constituted receipt of notice by the Appellant
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant's subsequent opt-out request was within the 28-day time limit

Ratio Decidendi

Notice for the purposes of rule 10(1)(c)(ii) is only received when the recipient is actually aware, or ought reasonably to be aware, of the notice in the circumstances. The mere inclusion of the notice in a large bundle, without drawing attention to it and where it is irrelevant to the immediate proceedings, does not constitute receipt of notice. Therefore, the Appellant did not receive notice until it was expressly made aware of the notice, and its opt-out request was within time.

Court Disposition

Application for costs denied

Orders

  • No order as to costs; Respondents' application for costs is refused.