Witton v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE - application to bar HMRC) [2024] UKFTT 489 (TC) (22 May 2024)

Witton v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE - application to bar HMRC) [2024] UKFTT 489 (TC) (22 May 2024)

HMRC's application to admit additional evidence and witness statement was allowed despite serious and significant delay, as the prejudice to HMRC outweighed that to the Appellant and the overriding objective required admission. The barring application was refused because, with the admitted evidence, HMRC had a realistic prospect of defending the appeal. Costs were awarded to the Appellant for HMRC's unreasonable conduct in contesting the burden of proof and failing to address Martland principles in their application.

Citation
[2024] UKFTT 489
Parties
Appellant: Daniel Witton; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
22 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Interlocutory Applications and Costs Determination
Outcome
HMRC not barred; HMRC's application to admit evidence allowed; Appellant's costs application allowed in part
Legal Topics
PAYE Liability, National Insurance Contributions, Burden of Proof, Admissibility of Evidence, Costs in Tribunal Proceedings
Tax Law Civil Procedure PAYE Liability National Insurance Contributions Burden of Proof Admissibility of Evidence Costs in Tribunal Proceedings

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Witton

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Interlocutory Applications and Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC should be barred from proceedings for lack of evidence
  2. 2 Whether HMRC may admit additional evidence and witness statement
  3. 3 Whether Appellant is entitled to costs for unreasonable conduct by HMRC

Ratio Decidendi

HMRC's application to admit additional evidence and witness statement was allowed despite serious and significant delay, as the prejudice to HMRC outweighed that to the Appellant and the overriding objective required admission. The barring application was refused because, with the admitted evidence, HMRC had a realistic prospect of defending the appeal. Costs were awarded to the Appellant for HMRC's unreasonable conduct in contesting the burden of proof and failing to address Martland principles in their application.

Court Disposition

HMRC not barred; HMRC's application to admit evidence allowed; Appellant's costs application allowed in part

Orders

  • HMRC's application to amend list of documents allowed
  • HMRC's application to admit second witness statement and exhibits allowed