United Kingdom Judgment

Fox McMaster Surveyors Ltd & Anor v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2018] UKFTT 300 (TC) (11 June 2018)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Tribunal refused the application to reinstate the appeal, finding that the application was out of time, the reasons for delay were insufficient, legal certainty would be undermined, and there was prejudice to the respondent. The merits of the appeal did not justify reinstatement.

Court disposition

application to reinstate appeal refused

02

Material facts

Parties

Fox McMaster Surveyors Ltd

Appellant

Christopher English

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Tax Tribunal Appeal / Application to Reinstate Appeal After Strike Out

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellants argued for reinstatement of their appeal, contending that the delay was justified and that the merits of their case warranted consideration.
Respondent
HMRC opposed the application, arguing that the application was out of time, that legal certainty would be undermined by reinstatement, and that there was prejudice to the respondent.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Pierhead Purchasing Limited; Rule 17 of the Tribunal Rules 2009

    Criteria for reinstatement of an appeal after strike out, including reasons for delay, effect on legal certainty, prejudice to parties, and merits of the appeal.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Tribunal refused the application to reinstate the appeal, finding that the application was out of time, the reasons for delay were insufficient, legal certainty would be undermined, and there was prejudice to the respondent. The merits of the appeal did not justify reinstatement.

Court disposition

application to reinstate appeal refused

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2018] UKFTT 300 (TC)

 Fox McMaster Surveyors Ltd & Anor v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2018] UKFTT 300 (TC) (11 June 2018) [ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] First-tier Tribunal (Tax) You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (Tax) >> Fox McMaster Surveyors Ltd & Anor v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2018] UKFTT 300 (TC) (11 June 2018) URL: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2018/TC06530.html Cite as: [2018] UKFTT 300 (TC) [ New search ] [ Printable PDF version ] [ Help ] Decision Number: TC 06530 Appellant: Fox McMaster Surveyors Ltd & Christopher English Respondent: The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs Chairmen / Special Commissioners: Dr Heidi POON Date Of Decision: 11/06/2018 Main Category:

PROCEDURE Main Subcategory: Other Notes: PROCEDURE - application to reinstate appeal - Rule 17 of the Tribunal Rules 2009 - application being out of time - Pierhead Purchasing Limited considered - relevant criteria for consideration - reasons for delay - the effect on legal certainty - prejudice to parties - merits of the appeal - applications refused PDF Copy: [2018] UKFTT 300 (TC) BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2018/TC06530.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Pierhead Purchasing Limited

Case cited

Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.