Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent) v Medpro Healthcare Limited and others (Appellants)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2026/0031

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) Medpro Healthcare Limited (2) Kalvinder Ruprai (3) Aver Healthcare

Respondent(s)

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Issue

Whether the Court of Appeal erred in endorsing the permissibility of judicial guidance as to the weighing of particular factors in deciding whether or not to allow an appeal out of time under section 83G(6) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (“VATA”).

Facts

The case concerns appeals by the Appellants (Medpro Healthcare Ltd, Kalvinder Ruprai, and Aver Healthcare Ltd) to the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (“the FTT”) against decisions made by HMRC (“the Appeals”). The Appeals were made outside of the relevant statutory time limit. The Applicants therefore sought permission from the FTT to appeal out of time under section 83G(6) of VATA. The FTT applied the decisions of the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (“the UT”) in Martland v HMRC (“Martland”) and HMRC v Katib (“Katib”), which provides guidance as to the factors and the weight of those factors in deciding on an application for permission to appeal out of time under section 83G(6) of VATA. The FTT refused permission to appeal out of time. The Appellants appealed to the UT on four grounds, one of which was that Martland and Katib were clearly wrong and should not be applied (“Ground Four”). The UT allowed the appeal on all four grounds. HMRC appealed to the Court of Appeal in respect of Ground Four. The Court of Appeal allowed HMRC’s appeal, endorsing the approach laid down in Martland and Katib. The Appellants now appeal to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

18 March 2026

Case origin

PTA

Back to top