UT/2024/000060 - [2025] UKUT 00143 (TCC)

Our rejection of Grounds One to Three provides a sufficient basis to dismiss the JR Claim. Grounds Four and Five do not, for the reasons which we have explained, arise for decision. Nevertheless we consider both Grounds for completeness, in recognition of the fact they were fully argued before us.

Grounds Four and Five are both concerned with that part of the Decision, in paragraph 25, by which HMRC decided that even if Paragraph 10 of the SP had applied, the Deficit Claim had not been made as soon as possible after the relevant judgments (the judgments in the Prudential cases) were handed down. In making this decision, HMRC were addressing Paragraph 13 of the SP, which provides as follows:

“An application to admit a claim outside the statutory time limits should be sent to the inspector dealing with the Claimant company and should include a full explanation of the circumstances of the case. The explanation should cover, but need not be limited to, all the criteria set out in paragraph 12. The application should be made as soon as possible. Delay in making a late claim after the circumstances which caused the claim to be late have ceased to apply may result in the claim being rejected.”

Paragraph 13 of the SP applies where the original circumstances which caused the relevant claim to be late do fall within the terms of Paragraph 10 of the SP or, more accurately, are circumstances of the kind referred to in Paragraph 10, where HMRC will admit the late claim. If those circumstances cease to apply, and there is then a further period of delay before the deficit claim is made, this may result in the claim being rejected.

In the present case, and by virtue of our decision on Grounds One, Two and Three, Paragraph 13 of the SP is not engaged. The decision of HMRC that the circumstances which caused the Deficit Claim to be late do not fall within the terms of Paragraph 10 of the SP is not one which the Claimant is able to challenge by judicial review. This decision therefore stands. This, in turn, means that the question of whether there was a delay, following the circumstances which caused the Deficit Claim to be late ceasing to apply, does not arise. HMRC were correct to refuse the Deficit Claim by reference to Paragraph 10 of the SP.