TC09640 - [2025] UKFTT 01114 (TC)

Each of the witness statements of Ms Humphries and Ms Smith referred to a pack of exhibits. Relying on paragraph 22 of the High Court judgment in Gestmin SGPS S.A v Credit Suisse (UK) Limited and another [2013] EWHC 3560, HMRC contend without the ability to cross examine on the documents introduced, the documents themselves should not be admitted.

We disagree. Whilst we accept that the terms of rule 27(2) FTT Rules provide that each party shall be required to produce and serve a list of the documents on which they intend to rely, the purpose of that rule is to ensure that the opposing party is given due notice of documents on which reliance is to be placed. Rules 5 and 15 FTT Rules give the Tribunal wide discretion in the governance of proceedings and the production of evidence. The witness statements exhibit certain documents which were included on the list of documents but also include documents not so listed. However, HMRC were given notice that such documents were to form part of these proceedings when the witness statements were served and have had months to consider them.

HMRC have not been impeded in the criticisms they have raised in respect of the unlisted exhibits. We were therefore provided with an extremely robust exposition of the asserted deficiencies in the documents fully enabling us to consider what weight we should give them. Therefore, and to the extent that the exhibited documents relate to the sample transactions identified by the Appellant, and on which this appeal therefore proceeded, we admit the documents.

We also determined to admit a limited number of further additional documents provided to us in a “clip” of the two sample supplies. The new documents were evidence of registration of the two Locums which were the subject of the specimen supplies and a purchase order which the Appellant contended completed the audit trail for the off-framework supply.