Peter Andrea v The Commissioners For Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs, TC 05575
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Dr Heidi POON |
| Judgment Date | 24 March 2017 |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] UKFTT 0850 (TC) |
| Respondent | The Commissioners For Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs |
| Appellant | Peter Andrea |
| Reference | TC 05575 |
| Court | First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) |
[2017] UKFTT 0850 (TC)
TC05575
Appeal number: TC/2015/01990
PROCEDURE – application for hearing in private – rule 32 of Tribunal
Rules – celebrity status of the appellant – deductibility of expenses against
income – principle of open justice – whether the test of necessity for
derogation met – whether anonymity strictly necessary – whether
confidentiality of information at risk of breach – whether right to privacy
infringed – Convention rights under Articles 6, 8 and 10 – Human Rights
Act 1998 – proportionality – alternative measures under rule 14 and s 4(2)
of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 – application refused
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
TAX CHAMBER
PETER ANDREA Appellant
- and -
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY’S Respondents
REVENUE & CUSTOMS
TRIBUNAL:
JUDGE HEIDI POON
Sitting in public at the Tribunal Centre, City Exchange, 11 Albion Street, Leeds
on 13 January 2016, and with post-hearing submissions from the parties in
February 2016
Steve Bartlett and Gary Brothers of Independent Tax, for the Appellant
Simon Bracegirdle and Mr B Horton, presenting officers of HM Revenue and
Customs, for the Respondents
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2016
2
DECISION
Introduction
1. By notice dated 3 September 2015, the Appellant’s representative, Independent
Tax, applied for the hearing of the substantive appeal to be held in private under rule 5 32 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 (‘the
Tribunal Rules’).
2. The case management hearing was in public, and was principally to hear the
application on behalf of the appellant for the substantive hearing to be held in private.
3. HMRC do not oppose the application. 10
4. There was no request to list the hearing with initials in place of the actual name
of the appellant prior to the hearing of the application. The session list therefore
recorded the name of the appellant to this application. Although sitting in public,
only the representatives for both sides attended the hearing; no member of the public
was present. 15
5. In recognition that my decision on the application could be appealed, I have
anonymised the decision and withheld details of the date and venue of the hearing
until the appeal process of this decision is exhausted.
The facts in outline
Background to the appeal 20
6. The appellant is a self-employed media entertainer and performer who earns his
income from a variety of sources, from television and public appearances, to
performance on stage, to modelling and writing, within the UK and abroad. He has a
public profile, and his representative refers to him as a celebrity.
7. HMRC opened enquiry into the appellant’s tax return for 2010-11. The 25 substantive matters of the appeal concern the deductibility of two sums of expenses:
(1) legal and professional expenses of £90,245 under s 34(1) and (2) of the
Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 (‘ITTOIA 2005’);
(2) expenditure of £15,055 claimed as Annual Investment Allowance
(AIA) under Part 2 of the Capital Allowances Act 2001 (‘CAA 2001’). 30
8. The legal and professional fees were incurred in connection with defamation
proceedings brought against the appellant’s ex-wife over comments she had made in
the written media and on television. It is the appellant’s case that he had brought the
proceedings because his relationship with his children and his reputation are
important to him. 35
To continue reading
Request your trial