L Hackett v HMRC

In L Hackett v HMRC [2020] UKUT 212 (TCC) (6 July) the UT refuses applicant’s argument that appeal proceedings should be carried out on the basis of a criminal rather than civil standard of proof

The appellant appealed against a preliminary decision of the FTT that: proceedings should not be stayed; the appropriate standard of proof was criminal (beyond reasonable doubt) rather than civil (balance of probabilities); and an earlier decision of the FTT in a related case should be admitted as evidence.

The case involved the giving to the appellant of a personal liability notice under FA 2007 Sch 24 para 19 in relation to a deliberate inaccuracy penalty assessed on a company (‘Intekx’) of which the appellant was the sole director. The penalty in the sum of nearly £13 million was assessed on the grounds that Intekx’s VAT returns contained deliberate ...

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.

If you are already a subscriber, sign in

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.

Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.