R v Epping and Harlow General Comrs.ex parte Goldstraw
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 May 1983 |
| Date | 11 May 1983 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION) -
COURT OF APPEAL-
Judicial review - Absence of taxpayer - Commissioners determined appeals in absence of taxpayer - Taxpayer's application to reopen appeals made at subsequent (different) proceedings refused - Taxpayer seeking leave to apply for judicial review of Commissioners' decision - Failure to appeal by Case Stated - Court's residual jurisdiction - Taxes Management Act 1970, ss 46(2), 50(4).
G's appeals against estimated assessments to income tax (after an earlier adjournment) came on for hearing before General Commissioners on 11 November 1980. G did not appear and was not represented and the Commissioners, after hearing the Inspector's case, determined the assessments in the figures which G's accountants had submitted to the Inspector on 20 February 1980. The Commissioners' Clerk sent a letter to G informing him of the decision. On 12 January 1981 the Inspector applied to the Commissioners for an interest certificate under s 70 of the Taxes Management Act 1970. At that hearing G sought to reopen the appeals and, on the advice of their Clerk, the Commissioners refused to do so. G sought leave for judicial review of that decision, seeking a declaration that the assessments confirmed were not final or binding on him and an order that the appeals be reheard. G alleged that the Clerk had maliciously advised the Commissioners not to reopen the appeals.
The High Court refused leave, holding that the Commissioners had been correctly advised by their Clerk because, under s 46(2) of the Taxes Management Act 1970, they had no power to reopen the appeals, their determination being final and conclusive. Accordingly whether the Clerk had acted maliciously was irrelevant. G appealed.
Held, (1) Having regard to s 46(2), Taxes Management Act 1970, the Commissioners had no power on 12 January 1981 to re-open their determination of the appeals on 11 November 1980.
Any advice by their clerk to this effect was therefore correct and would not be affected by any malice (of which in the event there was no evidence).
(2) The application for judicial review was within the residual jurisdiction of the Court and
(a) save in the most exceptional circumstance that jurisdiction would not be exercised where other remedies were available and had not been used. G could have applied to the Commissioners for a further adjournment or, within 30 days of their determination he could have applied to them to state a case for
the opinion of the Court (though whether he would have been successful was another matter). He did not do so;(b) evidence in support of G's allegation that he was unable to attend on 11 November 1980 was slender in the extreme.
Taking all matters which G urged into account the application for leave would be refused.
G's appeals against estimated income tax assessments originally came on for hearing before the General Commissioners on 6 August 1980. At that hearing Counsel represented G who was accompanied by his solicitor and accountant. At Counsel's request the hearing was adjourned to a fixed date, 11 November 1980. G did not then appear and was not represented. After hearing oral evidence from the Inspector the Commissioners determined the assessments in figures originally proposed by G's accountants in a letter of 20 February 1980 to the Inspector. The Commissioners' clerk informed G of the Commissioners' decision by letter dated 12 November 1980.
On 12 January 1981 the Commissioners met to consider another matter, namely an application by the Inspector for a certificate of tax carrying interest under s 70 of the Taxes Management Act 1970. At this hearing G sought to reopen the appeals on the grounds that he had been unable to attend the hearing on 11 November 1980 due to ill health. He produced a medical certificate relating to an illness some years earlier but no medical evidence of sickness at the relevant time. After a short adjournment the Commissioners decided that there were no grounds on which they could re-open the appeals.
G sought leave to apply for judicial review of the decision seeking (1) a declaration that the assessments as determined were not final or binding on him, and (2) an order that the appeals be reheard. He alleged that the Commissioners had refused to re-open the appeals because their clerk had maliciously advised them that they did not have power to do so.
The application was heard in the Queen's Bench Division before Stephen Brown J. on 18 February 1983 when the application was refused.
Stephen Brown J. - This is an application for leave to apply for judicial review by Mr. Ralph Hudson Goldstraw. By his notice of motion he seeks, firstly, a declaration that the purported assessments confirmed by the General Commissioners of Income Tax for Epping and Harlow made on 11 November 1980 are not final or binding upon him; secondly, he seeks an order that the General Commissioners of Income Tax for Epping and Harlow do hear and determine afresh the Applicant's request that his appeal against the said assessments be re-opened and re-heard.
The Applicant's tax affairs have a long history, so it would appear from the affidavits which he has filed and the documents annexed to his affidavits. The history is conveniently set out in an affidavit of Barbara Rae, a member of the Solicitors Office of the Inland Revenue sworn on 18 November 1982, which is annexed as Exhibit R.H.G.1. to Mr. Goldstraw's affidavit. It...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Poh Kiong Kok v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 581
...835 (distd) R v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club [1990] Times LR 3 January (refd) R v Epping & Harlow General Commissioners [1983] 3 All ER 257; 57 TC 536 (distd) Thomas Jacobs v William Seward (1872) LR 5 HL 464 (refd) Land Titles (Strata) Act (Cap 158, 1988Rev Ed)s 41 (8), First ......
- Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang v Syarikat Bekerjasama-sama Serbaguna Sungai Gelugor Dengan Tanggungan
-
R (McIntyre) v Gentoo Group Ltd
...will not be exercised where other remedies were available and have not been used”: per Sir John Donaldson MR R v Epping and Harlow General Commissioners ex p Goldstraw [1983] 3 All ER 257 at p262. That was applied by the Court of Appeal even after the Administrative Court had made a decisio......
-
Planning Cttee. v Lesquende Ltd
...Calveley, [1986] Q.B. 424; [1986] 1 All E.R. 257; (1985), 130 Sol. Jo. 53. (15) R. v. Epping & Harlow Gen. Commrs., ex p. Goldstraw, [1983] 3 All E.R. 257; [1983] STC 693; (1983), 57 T.C. 536, dictum of Donaldson, M.R. applied. (16) R. v. Home Secy., ex p. Swati, [1986] 1 W.L.R. 477; [1986]......