Elden v Revenue and Customs [2026] UKFTT 41 (TC) (08 January 2026)

Elden v Revenue and Customs [2026] UKFTT 41 (TC) (08 January 2026)

The Tribunal refused to strike out the appeal, finding that while the Appellant and his representative demonstrated repeated and significant failures to comply with directions, all required documents and information were ultimately provided before the hearing. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the non-compliance, though serious, had prevented a fair and just hearing or caused irreparable prejudice to HMRC. The use of AI and inaccurate case summaries in the Appellant's skeleton argument was criticised but did not, in itself, justify strike out. Proportionality required that lesser case management measures be considered before resorting to strike out.

Citation
[2026] UKFTT 41 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Mr Gary Elden; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal (first Tier Tribunal, Tax Chamber) / Application for Strike Out Under Rule 8(3)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (first Tier Tribunal) (tax Chamber) Rules 2020
Outcome
Strike out application refused; appeal to proceed.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Non Compliance With Tribunal Directions, Use of AI in Legal Submissions, Case Management, Proportionality of Sanctions
Tax Law Civil Procedure Strike Out Applications Non Compliance With Tribunal Directions Use of AI in Legal Submissions Case Management Proportionality of Sanctions

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Gary Elden

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal (first Tier Tribunal, Tax Chamber) / Application for Strike Out Under Rule 8(3)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (first Tier Tribunal) (tax Chamber) Rules 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant's repeated non-compliance with Tribunal directions justifies striking out the appeal under Rule 8(3)(b)
  2. 2 Whether the use of AI and inaccurate case summaries in the Appellant's skeleton argument constitutes a ground for strike out
  3. 3 Whether HMRC has suffered prejudice sufficient to prevent a fair and just hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal refused to strike out the appeal, finding that while the Appellant and his representative demonstrated repeated and significant failures to comply with directions, all required documents and information were ultimately provided before the hearing. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the non-compliance, though serious, had prevented a fair and just hearing or caused irreparable prejudice to HMRC. The use of AI and inaccurate case summaries in the Appellant's skeleton argument was criticised but did not, in itself, justify strike out. Proportionality required that lesser case management measures be considered before resorting to strike out.

Court Disposition

Strike out application refused; appeal to proceed.

Orders

  • The application by HMRC to strike out the appeal is refused.
  • The appeal will proceed to a substantive hearing on the merits.