Wallace v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 227 (TC) (12 April 2013)

Wallace v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 227 (TC) (12 April 2013)

The Tribunal refused to set aside its decision because the Appellant failed to provide specific particulars of prejudice caused by the late service of the Statement of Case, and the matters at issue were within the Appellant’s knowledge. The Tribunal found no sufficiently serious prejudice to justify setting aside the decision, and the balance of prejudice favored finality.

Citation
[2013] UKFTT 227
Parties
Appellant: Patrick Wallace; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Application to Set Aside Tribunal's Decision Refusing Extension of Time
Outcome
Application to set aside Tribunal's decision refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Procedural Fairness, Striking Out of Appeal
Tax Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Procedural Fairness Striking Out of Appeal

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

Parties

Patrick Wallace

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Application to Set Aside Tribunal's Decision Refusing Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal's decision refusing extension of time should be set aside due to alleged procedural unfairness
  2. 2 Whether late service of HMRC's Statement of Case prejudiced the Appellant sufficiently to justify setting aside the decision

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal refused to set aside its decision because the Appellant failed to provide specific particulars of prejudice caused by the late service of the Statement of Case, and the matters at issue were within the Appellant’s knowledge. The Tribunal found no sufficiently serious prejudice to justify setting aside the decision, and the balance of prejudice favored finality.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside Tribunal's decision refused

Orders

  • The Tribunal’s Decision dated 31 July 2012 will not be set aside.