Lam v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 79 (TC) (14 January 2014)

Lam v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 79 (TC) (14 January 2014)

HMRC did not act unreasonably in defending or conducting the appeal up to 1 February 2013, but did act unreasonably for the period from 1 February 2013 to 15 February 2013, justifying a limited award of costs for that period only.

Citation
[2014] UKFTT 79
Parties
Appellant: Ping Kong Lam; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in Tax Appeal / Post Withdrawal Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs awarded in part to appellant
Legal Topics
Costs, Unreasonable Conduct, Extension of Time, Withdrawal of Appeal
Tax Law Tribunal Procedure Costs Unreasonable Conduct Extension of Time Withdrawal 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ping Kong Lam

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Costs Application in Tax Appeal / Post Withdrawal Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC acted unreasonably in defending or conducting the appeal after receipt of new information
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's late costs application should be admitted out of time

Ratio Decidendi

HMRC did not act unreasonably in defending or conducting the appeal up to 1 February 2013, but did act unreasonably for the period from 1 February 2013 to 15 February 2013, justifying a limited award of costs for that period only.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded in part to appellant

Orders

  • HMRC to pay £150 in respect of costs to the appellant within 56 days of the decision's release date.