Key Facts
- •Mr. Trees was the sole director and beneficial owner of CCA Distribution Ltd.
- •HMRC denied CCA input tax deduction of £9,874,254.54 due to VAT fraud.
- •CCA's appeal was refused, and a civil evasion penalty of £1,974,850 was issued.
- •Mr. Trees received a Director's Liability Notice (DLN) for the same amount.
- •Mr. Trees appealed the DLN, and subsequently applied for further disclosure from HMRC.
- •The application centered on documents relating to the fraudsters mentioning Mr. Trees or CCA.
Legal Principles
Standard disclosure under CPR 31.6, modified by the Namli case to exclude documents not relied upon and entirely adverse to the applicant's case.
HMRC v Smart Price [2019] EWCA Civ 841 at [56]; Serious Organised Crime Agency v Namli and Topinvest Holdings International Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1411
In dishonesty cases, a more onerous disclosure obligation applies.
E-buyer and Citibank [2017] EWCA Civ 1416 [94]
The litigant determines document relevance unless another party proves otherwise.
Serious Organised Crime Agency v Namli
Disclosure should prevent unfair advantage or disadvantage; mere curiosity is insufficient.
Taylor v Anderton [1995] 1 WLR 447
Reasonableness of search for documents considers factors like number of documents, complexity, retrieval ease and expense, and significance.
CPR 31.7
Outcomes
Mr. Trees' application for further disclosure was refused.
HMRC's disclosure met the standard disclosure requirements as modified by Namli, and further disclosure was deemed disproportionate and unnecessary.