Howell v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 75 (TC) (24 January 2012)

Howell v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 75 (TC) (24 January 2012)

A payment of voluntary Class 3 National Insurance contributions made in accordance with the law and information available at the time, but rendered unnecessary by subsequent legislative changes, is not a payment made 'in error' under regulation 52(9) of the Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001. The obligation to refund does not arise in such circumstances.

Citation
[2012] UKFTT 75 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Janet Howell; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
24 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
National Insurance Contributions, Refund of Contributions, Interpretation of 'error' Under Social Security (contributions) Regulations 2001
Tax Law Social Security Law National Insurance Contributions Refund of Contributions Interpretation of 'error' Under Social Security (contributions) Regulations 2001

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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Howell

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether voluntary Class 3 National Insurance contributions were paid 'in error' under regulation 52(4) of the Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001, entitling the appellant to a refund.

Ratio Decidendi

A payment of voluntary Class 3 National Insurance contributions made in accordance with the law and information available at the time, but rendered unnecessary by subsequent legislative changes, is not a payment made 'in error' under regulation 52(9) of the Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001. The obligation to refund does not arise in such circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed