Askham v Inland Revenue

A second appeal to the Court of Appeal requires a matter of general public importance or another special reason. A challenge to the underlying tax assessment cannot be reopened in bankruptcy proceedings where the statutory appeal route has not been used. A possible failure to provide the prescribed information about appeal rights and time limits under the General Commissioners Jurisdiction and Procedure Regulations 1994 may justify seeking an extension of time for a tax appeal. That issue must be pursued separately and cannot be determined within a permission application arising from a bankruptcy order.

The Commissioners of Inland Revenue obtained a bankruptcy order against Roy Askham on 23 July 2001 after unpaid tax assessments, a county court judgment debt exceeding £380,000 and a statutory demand. The assessments had been reduced on appeal before the commissioners, but no statutory appeal on a point of law was lodged within the applicable time limit under the Taxes Management Act 1970.

Park J dealt with Mr Askham’s appeal against the bankruptcy order in his absence, concluding that there was no arguable basis for reopening the commissioners’ decision in the bankruptcy proceedings. Mr Askham sought permission for a second appeal. He argued that the commissioners might not have complied with rule 16(5) of the General Commissioners Jurisdiction and Procedure Regulations 1994, potentially affecting the time for appealing the tax decision. The central issue was whether permission should be granted and whether that notification issue could be reopened in the present appeal.

The application for permission to bring a second appeal was refused.

1. Second appeal threshold. A second appeal to the Court of Appeal is not permitted unless the proposed appeal raises a matter of general public importance or there is some other special reason for allowing it. The proposed challenge did not raise a general point of public importance.
2. Underlying tax assessments. The commissioners’ decision was final subject to the statutory rights of appeal. The bankruptcy proceedings did not provide jurisdiction to reopen the tax assessment issue or to use the appeal against the bankruptcy order as a substitute for the statutory tax appeal.
3. Notification issue. If the commissioners had failed to send the notice required by rule 16(5) of the General Commissioners Jurisdiction and Procedure Regulations 1994, and Mr Askham had consequently not been informed of the requirements for appealing, he might have had a basis for seeking an extension of time. The court did not determine whether the notice had been sent or what precise remedy might follow. That issue required examination of the documents and should be pursued with proper legal advice or assistance from the Citizens Advice Bureau.
4. Disposition. The Court of Appeal could not reopen that issue in this particular appeal against the bankruptcy order. The application was therefore refused.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Permission for a second appeal was refused in [2002] EWCA Civ 1322.
• High Court of Justice, Chancery Division: Park J considered the appeal against the bankruptcy order in February 2002 and found no arguable basis for reopening the commissioners’ tax decision in the bankruptcy proceedings.
• Chichester County Court: A judgment debt exceeding £380,000 followed the unpaid tax assessments; a statutory demand was then served and a bankruptcy order was made on 23 July 2001.