TC09638 - [2025] UKFTT 01112 (TC)

I disagree that these categories are unfocussed or disproportionate, and I respectfully disagree that ordering disclosure of correspondence between HMRC and any of the appellants or their proxies amounts to a 'fishing exercise'.

I do not fundamentally disagree with HMRC's view that the purpose of disclosure is not that both parties exchange all the documents in their possession, so that everyone can examine everything held at their leisure, and each form their own view of relevance and/or in the hope that "something might turn up".

However, standing back, it seems to me that this disclosure exercise was inadequate; and that it is neither fair nor just for the Tribunal to sit back and take no action in response to the application. It also seems to me that some of the criticisms which HMRC makes as to the potential scope of the disclosure sought in Categories 3 and 4 have some merit.

The parties' respective positions each give little quarter to the other. Fortunately, in a matter of case management as this, I am not constrained by the parties' respective, and somewhat polarised, positions, and I can seek - as I do below - to adopt a middle course where doing so seems the best way of effectuating the Tribunal's overriding objective.

HMRC shall disclose correspondence and any enclosed documentation, from 6 April 2000 and 31 January 2009, relating to the DTC and CGT issues in the relevant years for any individual appellant, and (for the avoidance of doubt) to round-the-world planning in the relevant years for each individual appellant, but not relating to the valuation of assets or to any Appellant's affairs in other tax years, passing:

Such disclosure is to be made of documents whether or not they are to be relied on by HMRC; and whether or not they support HMRC's case.

If documents existed but no longer exist, HMRC shall say when they were last in HMRC's possession, custody or control, and what has happened to them. In this regard, an assertion in a submission to the effect that papers have been transported across many HMRC offices and HMRC do not have all the enquiry correspondence (i) is not evidence; and (ii) does not answer to this requirement in any event.