Nolan v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 240 (TC) (03 March 2014)

Nolan v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 240 (TC) (03 March 2014)

A criminal conviction for harbouring excise goods with intent to defraud HMRC does not preclude a subsequent civil assessment for excise duty on the same goods. The civil assessment is not penal in nature, does not constitute double jeopardy, and is a lawful means of collecting unpaid tax. No legitimate expectation was created by HMRC that precluded the assessment. The assessment was proportionate and did not breach the appellant’s human rights under the ECHR.

Citation
[2014] UKFTT 240
Parties
Appellant: Terrance Nolan; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
03 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Excise Duty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Substantive Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Civil Assessment After Criminal Conviction, Legitimate Expectation, Proportionality, Human Rights (a1 P1, Article 6), Public Law Challenges, Duty Point Identification
Tax Law Criminal Law European Human Rights Law Excise Duty Civil Assessment After Criminal Conviction Legitimate Expectation Proportionality Human Rights (a1 P1, Article 6) +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terrance Nolan

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Excise Duty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Substantive Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a criminal conviction for harbouring excise goods with intent to defraud HMRC precludes a subsequent civil assessment for excise duty on the same goods
  2. 2 Whether the civil assessment is penal in nature and constitutes double jeopardy
  3. 3 Whether HMRC made representations or induced a legitimate expectation that no civil assessment would follow the criminal proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

A criminal conviction for harbouring excise goods with intent to defraud HMRC does not preclude a subsequent civil assessment for excise duty on the same goods. The civil assessment is not penal in nature, does not constitute double jeopardy, and is a lawful means of collecting unpaid tax. No legitimate expectation was created by HMRC that precluded the assessment. The assessment was proportionate and did not breach the appellant’s human rights under the ECHR.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Assessment for excise duty in the sum of £40,688 upheld