Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The hearing took place on 17 June 2021. The form of the hearing was V (video) on the Tribunal video platform. A face-to-face hearing was not held because of the pandemic. The documents to which I was referred were a documents bundle of 142 pages (the �DB�) and an authorities bundle of 56 pages.
Prior notice of the hearing had been published on the gov.uk website, with information about how representatives of the media or members of the public could apply to join the hearing remotely in order to observe the proceedings.� As such, the hearing was held in public.
Mr Oladapo Sanusi, litigator of HM Revenue and Customs� Solicitor�s Office, for the Respondents
This decision relates to an appeal by the Appellant against a decision by the Respondents made on 26 June 2019 (which was upheld by the Respondents on 14 August 2019, following a review) to issue a notice of requirement (an �NOR�) to provide security in the amount of �100,779.39 for the Appellant�s VAT liabilities.
The NOR was issued pursuant to Paragraph 4 of Schedule 11 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (the �VATA�), which provides as follows:
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.