Judgment summary
This case concerns an application by Goldmund Byrne ("GB") for permission to bring a late appeal against HMRC penalties and interest for late filing and late payment of self-assessment tax for the tax years 2015-16 to 2019-20 (1). The delays in making the application ranged from 160 to 3,604 days against a 30-day statutory appeal window (50, 156).
The tribunal applied the three-stage test from William Martland v The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs [2018] UKUT 0178 (TCC), considering the length of delay, the reasons for the default, and all the circumstances of the case, including the balance of prejudice to each party (45-48, 154).
The tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction over certain grounds, including allegations of unfair treatment, issues concerning Time to Pay arrangements, interest charges, and the allocation of payments between principal tax, penalties and interest, and struck those grounds out under Rule 8(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 (151-153).
Having considered the remaining grounds, the tribunal held that GB had not established a reasonable excuse persisting throughout the relevant period and refused the application for permission to bring a late appeal, so the appeal was dismissed (166, 204).
Background
GB had been registered for self-assessment since 20 June 2006, with paper notices to file issued annually to his registered address (9). His electronic returns for the tax years 2015/16 to 2019/20 were filed late, with delays ranging from about one year to over two years after the due dates (9).
HMRC charged GB penalties on twenty-nine occasions between 11 March 2015 and 9 October 2024 (10). As of 5 June 2025, GB's outstanding tax charges amounted to £26,179.23 (13). GB had previously appealed successfully against penalties relating to his 2012/2013 tax affairs, although at the hearing he could not recall doing so (14, 32, 78).
The relevant period for the application was between 11 March 2015 and 25 February 2025 (15). GB appealed to the tribunal on 25 February 2025, attaching a letter dated 15 February 2025 addressed to HMRC, and a screenshot of an online appeal attempt made the same day (18).
Core dispute
GB sought permission to bring a late appeal against penalties and interest charged for late filing and late payment of self-assessment tax for 2015-16 to 2019-20 (6). He relied on six grounds, including his health conditions and the impact of IR35 reforms, Brexit and COVID-19 (Ground 1), unfairness in HMRC's allocation of payments to penalties and interest rather than principal tax (Ground 2), medical and mental health impairment (Ground 3), disproportionate imposition of penalties (Ground 4), formal diagnoses of autism and ADHD made in mid-2025 (Ground 5), and HMRC's alleged failure to offer support to a vulnerable litigant (Ground 6) (20-25).
HMRC opposed the application, arguing the delays, ranging from 160 to 3,604 days, were serious and significant, that GB had shown no reasonable excuse, and that several grounds fell outside the tribunal's jurisdiction, being matters of inability to pay, fairness, Time to Pay arrangements, interest, and allocation of payments (50, 122-138). HMRC also applied under Rule 8(2)(a) and Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Rules to strike out the proceedings for lack of jurisdiction or no reasonable prospect of success (113-114, 139-148).
Court findings
The tribunal held it lacked jurisdiction over Grounds 2 and 4, and struck out, under Rule 8(2) of the Tribunal Rules, matters concerning HMRC's alleged unfairness, failure to detect or support GB's mental health, allocation of payments, Time to Pay arrangements, and interest charges (151-153).
Applying Martland, the tribunal found the delays of 160 to 3,604 days to be serious and significant (156). On the reasons for default, the tribunal accepted that GB suffered health conditions that intermittently affected him but found the medical evidence, including a GP letter dated 13 June 2024 and incomplete medical records, did not specify relevant dates or establish that these conditions prevented him from appealing at any point prior to 25 February 2025 (159-162, 166).
The tribunal noted GB's ability to work and take on company directorships during the relevant period, including incorporating Manus Management Ltd on 25 April 2024, as evidence against his claimed inability to manage his affairs (167-169). It found no evidence HMRC were aware of his autism or ADHD before mid-2025 (172), and held that insufficiency of funds is not a reasonable excuse absent events outside GB's control, of which there was insufficient evidence (175, 201).
In evaluating all the circumstances, the tribunal weighed the need for finality and efficient, proportionate litigation against the prejudice to GB, concluding that GB's underlying case, including Ground 1, was weak and that the balance favoured refusal (184-196).
Outcome
The tribunal refused GB's application for permission to bring a late appeal against the penalties and interest in dispute (204). The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Major issues / areas of contention
- Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider all of GB's grounds of appeal, including allegations of unfairness, Time to Pay arrangements, interest charges, and allocation of payments
- The length of the delay in making the late appeal application, ranging from 160 to 3,604 days against a 30-day statutory time limit
- Whether GB's health conditions, including later-diagnosed autism and ADHD, amounted to a reasonable excuse persisting throughout the relevant period
- Whether insufficiency of funds could constitute a reasonable excuse for the failures
- Application of the three-stage Martland test for permitting late appeals
- Balancing the need for finality and efficient, proportionate litigation against prejudice to the appellant
- HMRC's alternative application to strike out the proceedings under Rule 8(2)(a) and Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Rules