Nerijus Antuzis & Ors v DJ Houghton Catching Services Ltd & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1795 (Ch)
HM Revenue & Customs Commissioners v John Patrick Walsh
13 September 2023
[2023] EWHC 2213 (Ch)
High Court
Mr. Walsh owed HMRC a lot of money in taxes. He tried to get the debt cancelled, but failed. A judge ordered the sale of his properties (except his house) to pay the debt. The judge will decide later whether to sell his house as well.
Key Facts
- •HMRC obtained a default judgment against John Patrick Walsh for £2,511,147.13 in March 2014 for unpaid taxes dating back to 1993.
- •Charging orders were obtained over several properties owned by Mr. Walsh.
- •Mr. Walsh applied to set aside or vary the default judgment in November 2016, claiming he was unaware of the claim until August 2016 and that the assessments were vastly overstated.
- •The application was stayed pending an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT), which largely dismissed Mr. Walsh's appeal.
- •Mr. Walsh argued unjust enrichment, violation of Article 1 Protocol 1 (A1P1) and Article 6 and 8 of the ECHR, and abuse of process.
- •HMRC argued that the assessments were made lawfully, and that Mr. Walsh failed to act promptly and did not have a real prospect of success.
Legal Principles
Service of claim form where defendant's address is unknown.
CPR 6.9
Setting aside default judgment under Part 12 of CPR.
CPR 13.2, 13.3
Real prospect of success test.
Part 24 CPR
Relief from sanctions test (Denton v TH White).
Denton v TH White
Value Added Tax Act 1994 assessment provisions.
Value Added Tax Act 1994
Taxes Management Act 1970 assessment provisions.
Taxes Management Act 1970
TMA 1970 relief provisions (Schedule 1AB).
TMA 1970, Schedule 1AB
Unjust enrichment.
Woolwich Equitable Building Society v IRC [1993] AC 7
Court will not go behind a tax assessment in civil proceedings.
Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Pearlberg [1953] 1 WLR 331
ECHR Article 1 Protocol 1 (A1P1).
ECHR Article 1 Protocol 1
ECHR Article 6 (right to a fair trial).
ECHR Article 6
ECHR Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life).
ECHR Article 8
Enforcement of charging orders.
Charging Orders Act 1979, CPR 73.10C
Abuse of process.
Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police [1982] AC 529
Outcomes
Mr. Walsh's application to set aside or vary the default judgment was dismissed.
Mr. Walsh failed to demonstrate a real prospect of successfully defending the claim on any of his grounds, did not act promptly, and did not meet the requirements for relief from sanctions.
Orders for sale of Mr. Walsh's properties (excluding Woodways) were granted.
The outstanding debt was substantial, and sale of the properties was deemed necessary to recover the debt. Mr. Walsh's A1P1 and Article 8 rights were considered, but did not outweigh HMRC's right to recover the debt.
The claim for sale of Woodways (Mr. Walsh's home) was adjourned for one year.
To allow time for the sale of other properties to determine if there is a remaining shortfall before considering the sale of the family home.