His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and GS (TC)
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Judge West |
| Neutral Citation | [2023] UKUT 9 (AAC),[2023] UKUT 9 (AAC) |
| Subject Matter | Tax credits,family credit - other,Tribunal procedure,practice - tribunal jurisdiction,Universal Credit - Other,West,M |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Published date | 31 January 2023 |
HMRC v SSWP and GS (TC)
[2023] UKUT 9 (AAC)
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Appeal No. UA-2021-001437-TC
(ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER) UA-2021-001302-TC
(previously CTC/576/2021
CTC/581/2021)
On Appeal from the First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber)
SC946/20/01217
BETWEEN
Appellant HIS MAJESTY’S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS
and
Respondent (1) THE SECRETARY OF STATE
FOR WORK AND PENSIONS
(2) GS
BEFORE UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WEST
Decided on consideration of the papers: 4 January 2023
DECISION
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal sitting at Bolton dated 2 December 2020
under file reference SC946/20/01217 involves an error on a point of law. The
appeal against that decision is allowed and the decision of the Tribunal set
aside.
The decision is remade. The remade decision is to dismiss the claimant’s
appeal from HMRC’s decision of 12 August 2020. The claimant and his
HMRC v SSWP and GS (TC) [2023] UKUT 9 (AAC)
HMRC v (1) SSWP UA-2021-001437-TC
(2) GS (TC) UA-2021-001302-TC
(CTC/576/2021
CTC/581/2021)
2
partner were not entitled to tax credits from 7 July 2020 because they made a
claim for universal credit on that day and the Secretary of State was satisfied
that they met the basic conditions for eligibility specified in s.4(1)(a) to (d) of
the Welfare Reform Act 2012.
This decision is made under section 12(1), (2)(a) and (2)(b)(ii) of the
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
REASONS
Introduction
1. The question which has to be decided on this appeal is whether the First-
tier Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) erred in law in its decision of 2 December 2020
when it allowed the claimant’s appeal from the decision of HMRC dated 12
August 2020 that the claimant and his partner were not entitled to tax credits
from 7 July 2020 because they had claimed universal credit on that date and
the Secretary of State was satisfied that they met the basic conditions for
eligibility specified in s.4(1)(a) to (d) of the Welfare Reform Act 2012.
2. The Tribunal allowed the claimant’s appeal and found that, given that the
stop notice from the Secretary of State was only received by HMRC on 10
July 2020 and that the claimant’s application for universal credit had been
made and withdrawn on 7 July 2020, the Tribunal did not consider as sound
the assertion made by HMRC that there could be no doubt that the claimant
and his partner satisfied the basic conditions of entitlement. There was a
doubt as to whether the basic conditions were satisfied until such time as his
partner had submitted information and the appeal therefore succeeded.
Consequently their entitlement to working tax credits did not come to an end
from 7 July 2020 by the making of such a claim.
HMRC v SSWP and GS (TC) [2023] UKUT 9 (AAC)
HMRC v (1) SSWP UA-2021-001437-TC
(2) GS (TC) UA-2021-001302-TC
(CTC/576/2021
CTC/581/2021)
3
3. Whether the Tribunal erred in law in so concluding turns on the meaning
and legal effect of certain provisions within the Universal Credit (Transitional
Provisions Regulations 2014 (“the UC TP Regs”), as they were in force at the
date of HMRC’s decision on 12 August 2020. A related and logically prior
question also arises, however, about the extent of a Tribunal’s jurisdiction to
consider issues concerning entitlement to tax credits under the UC TP Regs
when considering an appeal from a decision which has brought a claimant’s
entitlement to tax credits to an end when the claimant claims universal credit.
There is also a further question about the effect of a withdrawal of a claim for
universal credit after it has been submitted.
4. This appeal was initially stayed behind a block of cases which dealt with a
number of issues relating to eligibility for what are termed “legacy benefits”
(which include tax credits) after the making of a claim for universal credit.
After those appeals had been determined, the stay was lifted on 19 January
2022 and further case management directions were made. However, on 28
June 2022 the Chamber President, Mrs Justice Farbey, convened a three-
judge panel in the case of HMRC v (1) Secretary of State for Work and
Pensions (2) SA (TC) [2022] UKUT 350 (AAC) (“SA”) to decide that appeal
in order to give a definitive answer to the first two questions summarised
above in the context of a tax credits appeal. The decision in this appeal was
therefore held back until the decision in SA had been determined. That three-
judge panel (of which I was a member) promulgated its decision on 20
December 2022. I am satisfied that there is no material difference between
the appeal in that case and the appeal in this case and I am also satisfied that
I can now proceed to determine this appeal in the light of the decision in SA
without requiring further submissions by the parties or holding an oral hearing.
In his original response to HMRC’s appeal the claimant sought an oral hearing
of the appeal, although in his most recent response of 19 July 2022 he asked
for the matter to be decided without a hearing and did not wish to make any
further observations or submissions. The Upper Tribunal is empowered to
To continue reading
Request your trial