TC09548 - [2025] UKFTT 00700 (TC)

The PTA Application also submits that it was an error of law for me to decide the SoC Application on the papers, because the SoC Application included a request for a debarring order.

The Rules allow, but do not require, case management issues to be decided at a hearing, see Rule 5(3)(f). It is only where the decision is one which “disposes of the proceedings, or a part of the proceedings” that a hearing is required, see Rule 29(1).

The Tribunal receives many applications for HMRC to be barred from the proceedings, but rarely makes such an order. If a hearing was required whenever an appellant asked the Tribunal to bar HMRC, there would be numerous unnecessary hearings, with consequential delays to the progress of the appeals.

The position is likely to be different when a judge considers that HMRC’s conduct is such that a barring order may be required, but that was not the position in this case: I was clear that the next step was to issue the Directions: there was no need for a barring order. The Appellant’s inclusion of that request in the SoC Application does not mean that I was required to hold a hearing. There was no error of law.