Jennifer Marie Bridgett Webster v HMRC
[2023] EWHC 2697 (KB)
Jennifer Webster v The Commissioners for HMRC
8 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 530 (KB)
High Court
A UK citizen sued the tax authority (HMRC) for sharing her banking information with the US. HMRC said the lawsuit was a sneaky attempt to attack a whole system, not just fix a small mistake, and that it was secretly funded. The judge decided there was enough doubt to let the case go to trial, so the lawsuit will continue.
Key Facts
- •Ms Webster, a UK resident who renounced US citizenship in 2019, claims HMRC's transfer of her banking data to US tax authorities (2016-2020) under FATCA breached her data protection rights.
- •HMRC's defence argues the claim is an abuse of process, primarily because it challenges the legality of the FATCA regime itself, rather than a specific data breach, and because it is anonymously funded.
- •The Claimant initially framed her claim as judicial review but later sought damages only, abandoning the declaration.
- •The court ordered disclosure of the funder's identity, which the Claimant resisted, leading to a stay of proceedings.
- •The Claimant applied to strike out HMRC's abuse of process defence, arguing it lacked reasonable grounds and no real prospect of success.
- •The Claimant’s funding contract is subject to conditions of funder secrecy; she does not herself know its identity (although her legal team does) and the funder would withdraw funding sooner than have its identity revealed.
Legal Principles
Judicial Review is a remedy of last resort; if an adequate alternative remedy exists, it should be pursued first.
St George’s, University of London v Rafique-Aldawery [2018] EWCA Civ 2520; El Gizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 60 (Admin)
It is an abuse of process to challenge the validity of public law actions and decisions otherwise than by judicial review.
O’Reilly v Mackman [1983] 2 AC 237; Trim v North Dorset District Council [2011] 1 WLR 1901
Claims for judicial review must be filed promptly, within 3 months of the grounds arising.
CPR 54.5(1)
A claim for judicial review may include a claim for damages, but may not seek such a remedy alone.
CPR 54.3(2)
The court may strike out a statement of case if it discloses no reasonable grounds for defending the case.
CPR 3.4(2)(a)
The court may give summary judgment if a party has no real prospect of succeeding and there is no other compelling reason for a trial.
CPR 24.3
Abuse of process requires a broad, merits-based judgment considering public and private interests and whether the proceedings can be conducted justly.
Johnson v Gore Wood [2002] AC 1; Clark v University of Lincolnshire & Humberside [2000] 1 WLR 1988; Richards v Worcestershire CC [2018] PTSR 1563
Outcomes
The Claimant’s application for a terminating ruling is dismissed.
HMRC’s abuse of process defence, including the element concerning funder identity, has sufficient legal and factual substance to warrant a trial. The court found that the legal basis for the defence was not ‘hopeless in law’ and that there was a realistic prospect of success. The court also rejected the Claimant's procedural arguments against the defense proceeding to trial.
Similar Cases
Vision HR Solutions Limited, R (on the application of) v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2023] EWHC 1659 (Admin)
Anthony Elbourn v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 276 (GRC)
Damian Warburton v The Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary
[2023] EWCA Civ 209
YSL v Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
[2024] EWHC 391 (KB)