Blog
Permission to Visit - Goldilocks and the Three Bank Statements
Robert Houchill
In an ideal world, witnesses providing evidence in First-tier Tax Tribunal proceedings would do so in person at a hearing. It is often easier to build a rapport with the Judge in person, you avoid technical issues, and however informal the Tax Tribunal is in comparison to the civil courts, there is something to be said about looking into the whites of a witness’s eyes during a cross examination.
Naturally, it is not always possible for a witness to attend the hearing in person; whether that is because they live abroad, have travel arrangements cancelled, or a multitude of other possible reasons.
On 2 June 2025, the First-tier Tax Tribunal has issued updated guidance in relation to the procedure to be followed when a party to a case in the First-tier Tax Tribunal wishes to rely on oral evidence from a witness via video or telephone from outside of the UK. The guidance states that the party seeking to rely on such evidence, in all cases, needs permission from the Tribunal.
When considering whether to grant permission, the Tribunal will need to be satisfied that the country in which the witness is located consents and that no “legal or diplomatic barriers prevent the witness from giving evidence in the territory in which they are situated”.
Permission is not required where the individual is situated in the UK or certain Crown Dependencies, British Overseas Territories or The Sovereign Base Areas (including but not limited to Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, and the British Virgin Islands).
The party seeking permission should first check the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (“FCDO”) to establish what the country in question has decided in previous cases. If a country has expressly refused permission before, then oral evidence from that country cannot be taken.
The process to seek permission requires the party to make an application to the Tax Chamber, and copy in the other party, “as soon as possible”. Failure to apply in sufficient time may result in the Tribunal refusing to admit the evidence altogether. The application to the Tribunal should include all of the information prescribed in the guidance about the witness and the jurisdiction that they intend to provide their evidence from.
The other party should then respond within 14 days of the application to indicate what (if any) aspects of the witness evidence remain in dispute and whether cross-examination is necessary. If no evidence is in dispute, typically the Tribunal would instead rely on the written evidence and it will not be necessary for the witness to be called to provide oral evidence.
The FCDO may be able to make additional enquiries (for a fee) to countries which have specified that individual permission is required, or have not replied to them. The Tribunal will direct the party seeking to rely on the evidence to contact the Taking of Evidence from Abroad Unit (“ToEU”) to avail itself of this service.
If the country in question refuses permission or fails to reply, the Tribunal should also refuse to admit the proposed oral evidence. If permission is refused and the witness does not attend the hearing, it is possible that the Tribunal could disregard the evidence of that witness.
The above highlights a considerable concern for parties who wish to rely on oral evidence being given from abroad: timing. The Tribunal Judge may have judicial discretion to delay the hearing for the enquiries by the ToEU to be made, but is not obliged to do so. An application to rely on oral evidence from abroad should be made without delay and as soon as a party considers that it is likely to be necessary.
In summary, it may be possible to obtain permission for a witness to give oral evidence from outside of the UK but this is not guaranteed, and careful consideration needs to be given to the timing, application and logistics.
About the author
Krishna Mahajan is a Senior Associate in the Dispute Resolution Team, who specialises in litigation and resolution of complex tax matters.
Latest blogs & news
The English Court: A Fraudster’s Crypto-nite
The English High Court, in Mr Dollar Bill Limited v Persons Unknown and Others [2021] EWHC 2718 (Ch), has once again come to the rescue for victims of fraud – this time armed with a Norwich Pharmacal Order to be served outside the jurisdiction.
Civil Fraud Quarterly Round-Up: Q4 2021
A Civil Fraud quarterly round-up (4th quarter 2021)
‘De-risking’ and financial exclusion
Rebecca Niblock and Mary Young follow on from an article they wrote in September 2020 about whether there should be a right to banking, and the possibly unintended consequences of banking facilities being withdrawn or frozen.
£26 billion fraud: The other side of the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Schemes
We have previously examined how the Government’s Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Schemes (the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS), Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS) and Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CLBILS)(together the “Schemes”) work. A report issued by the Public Accounts Committee on 10 December 2020 highlights the darker side of the Schemes and what it is costing the UK taxpayer.
Firms brace for negligence impact
Accounting firms should be bracing themselves for a rise in professional negligence claims as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Fraud and opportunism during COVID-19
The current global pandemic has provided and will continue to provide plentiful opportunities for fraud and opportunism.
Insolvency and furlough fraud – directors beware!
There has been much mention in the press in recent times about the amount of allegedly incorrect or fraudulent claims made by employers under the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (“CJRS”) (furlough scheme).
Court makes Search Order in COVID times
A search order, made pursuant to section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act 1997 and CPR Part 25, is one of the most draconian orders the English civil courts can make. No Respondent really wants a search team to enter their premises but because of Covid -19 the search team is even less welcome than usual.
How to guard against and respond to fraud in the charity sector
It has been widely reported that fraudsters are currently seeking to exploit the situation with COVID-19. Alarmingly, Action Fraud reported an increase in coronavirus related fraud by 400% in March. In this blog we outline some of the critical questions, which all charities, irrespective of size and stature, should be asking themselves to identify areas of risk and detect fraud and how to best respond if the charity has been a victim of fraud.
Remote mediation in civil litigation: Does it really work?
The legal profession is increasingly reliant on technology, and never more so than during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many clients are wondering what impact the restrictions on our movement will have on their upcoming mediations.
US and UK cybersecurity agencies publish a joint statement warning of a rise in Covid-related cybercrime
On 8 April 2020, GCHQ’s National Cyber Security Centre and the US Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency published a joint advisory about a rise in cybercrime related to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Abuse of Power of Attorney: the importance of staying vigilant in the current COVID-19 climate
The self-isolation and social distancing bought about as a result of the coronavirus pandemic leaves the elderly and incapacitated even more vulnerable to financial abuse. It is has been well reported that fraudsters are seeking to take advantage of the current situation whether via the internet, on the phone or in person but it also seems likely that this period will sadly see a rise in abuse of power of attorney by those closer to home.
Alok Sharma shakes up insolvency laws
Last week and, again, on Saturday 25 March 2020, the government announced plans to introduce changes to current insolvency laws to ease pressures on UK businesses being caused by the global pandemic, COVID19. See latest announcement here.
We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page.
Contact us today
Or call +44 (0)20 7814 1200
You may also be interested in:
Blog
The rise of the cryptoassets in financial remedies
Connie Atkinson
Blog
Supreme Court clarifies VAT group rules in Prudential v HMRC
Waqar Shah
Share insightLinkedIn X Facebook Email to a friend Print