COLIN WISEMAN v Revenue & Customs (CAPITAL GAINS TAX - Information notice issued under Schedule 36 to the Finance Act 2008) [2022] UKFTT 75 (TC) (25 August 2020)
Ten of the twelve disputed documents (seven letters, two telephone notes, and one meeting note from 3 September 2002) are privileged as their dominant purpose was the seeking or giving of legal advice between client and solicitor; two documents relating to the 31 July 2002 meeting are not privileged as their dominant purpose was not legal advice, and privileged content cannot be separated for redaction, so they must be disclosed.
- Citation
- [2022] UKFTT 75 (TC)
- Parties
- Applicant: Colin Wiseman; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 25 August 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Tax Tribunal Application Under Information Notice: Resolution of Disputes as to Privileged Communications Regulations 2009 / Determination of Privilege Dispute Under Written Representations, No Oral Hearing
- Outcome
- Partially allowed; privilege upheld for ten documents, disclosure ordered for two documents.
- Legal Topics
- Legal Professional Privilege, Disclosure of Documents, Capital Gains Tax, Information Notices, Privilege Disputes
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Colin Wiseman
Applicant
The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Tax Tribunal Application Under Information Notice: Resolution of Disputes as to Privileged Communications Regulations 2009 / Determination of Privilege Dispute Under Written Representations, No Oral Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether documents requested by HMRC under Schedule 36 to the Finance Act 2008 are protected by legal professional privilege and thus exempt from disclosure
- 2 Whether redaction of privileged content is appropriate or possible in the disputed documents
Ratio Decidendi
Ten of the twelve disputed documents (seven letters, two telephone notes, and one meeting note from 3 September 2002) are privileged as their dominant purpose was the seeking or giving of legal advice between client and solicitor; two documents relating to the 31 July 2002 meeting are not privileged as their dominant purpose was not legal advice, and privileged content cannot be separated for redaction, so they must be disclosed.
Court Disposition
Partially allowed; privilege upheld for ten documents, disclosure ordered for two documents.
Orders
- Applicant to disclose the two documents relating to the 31 July 2002 meeting to HMRC no later than 56 days after the date of release of this decision, unless an application for permission to appeal is made, in which case disclosure is extended until 14 days after final resolution of such appeal.
- Ten documents (seven letters, two telephone notes, one meeting note from 3 September 2002) are not to be disclosed as they are privileged.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment