TC09548 - [2025] UKFTT 00700 (TC)

PTA applications are rarely made after case management decisions, at least in part because of the related case law, see §33. The vast majority of PTA applications relate to substantive decisions which are already in the public domain. In contrast, most case management decisions are not published because they are of interest only to the parties and relate to the steps taken by the Tribunal as it seeks to move an appeal towards a hearing of the substantive dispute. The First and Second Decisions were not published.

However, given the facts of this case, the grounds set out in the PTA Application and the possibility that HMRC will renew the application by applying to the Upper Tribunal (“UT”) against two unpublished case management decisions, I decided it was in the interests of justice to publish this PTA Decision, and incorporate within it the First and Second Decisions in relation to which HMRC has sought permission to appeal.

That approach meets the requirements of open justice as set out in Dring v Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd [2019] UKSC 38 at [2], where the Supreme Court approved the following passage from Toulson LJ’s judgment in R (Guardian News and Media Ltd) v City of Westminster Magistrates' Court [2013] QB 618:

“Open justice. The words express a principle at the heart of our system of justice and vital to the rule of law. The rule of law is a fine concept but fine words butter no parsnips. How is the rule of law itself to be policed? It is an age old question. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes—who will guard the guards themselves? In a democracy, where power depends on the consent of the people governed, the answer must lie in the transparency of the legal process. Open justice lets in the light and allows the public to scrutinise the workings of the law, for better or for worse.”