The Commissioners for HMRC v The Taxpayer
[2024] UKUT 12 (TCC)
Equity Advisory Limited & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC
29 August 2024
[2024] UKFTT 00784 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal
A bank tried to keep its name and a settlement amount secret in a tax case. The judge said no, because keeping information completely hidden was too difficult and open court cases are important.
Key Facts
- •A bank (third party) applied for redaction of information in a tax tribunal decision to protect commercially sensitive details.
- •The application sought anonymity for the bank, the settlement amount, and any information leading to their identification.
- •The application was based on Tribunal Rule 14, concerning disclosure and publication of information.
- •HMRC initially consented, but later expressed concerns about the breadth of the requested redactions.
- •The appellants were largely neutral, due to a non-disparagement clause with the bank.
- •The Tribunal considered principles of open justice and the potential for 'jigsaw identification'.
Legal Principles
Tribunal Rule 14 allows for orders prohibiting disclosure or publication of specified documents or information, or any matter likely to identify a person the Tribunal considers should not be identified.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, Rule 14
The Tribunal retains discretion to decline to make an order even with consent from parties.
Implied from Tribunal's powers and overriding objective
Open justice principles are strong, and there must be strong reasons for redaction.
Upper Tribunal case law and judicial precedent (implied)
The court must be alert to 'jigsaw identification', where seemingly innocuous pieces of information, when combined, can reveal an individual's identity; however, this threat should not justify blanket prohibitions on disclosure.
Attorney-General v BBC (Nr 3) [2022] EWHC 1189 (QB)
Outcomes
The bank's application for redaction was dismissed.
The Tribunal found the reasons for redaction insufficient to justify the scope of the request. The risk of 'jigsaw identification' made the broad redaction of 'Confidential Information' unworkable. The Tribunal found the need for open justice outweighed the bank's concerns.