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.
a decision of and refusal of leave to appeal by the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)
History [1] The history is set out in detail in the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (“the FTT”) dated 19 December 2012 (2013) UKFTT 792 (TC) . I take a summary of the history, which I have revised, from the decision of the Upper Tribunal (“the UT”).
[4] Carlton made four Fleming claims to the respondents before 31 March 2009. The claims are fully described in the FTT’s decision.
[5] The first claim was made in November 2007. The respondents processed it for repayment to Carlton but by mistake repaid the monies to the applicant. On 7 July 2009 the respondents issued assessments to the applicant for recovery of the sums paid. The applicant requested a review. The review confirmed the assessments. On 28 February 2011 the applicant appealed to the FTT.
[6] The remaining Fleming claims were also based upon letters submitted by Carlton in November 2007. The respondents rejected these claims and Carlton appealed to the FTT. After the expiry of the time-bar period, the applicant requested that the claims in these appeals should be repaid to it. By a decision dated 4 May 2011 the respondents intimated that those claims would not be paid to the applicant. The applicant appealed to the FTT.
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.