Pendragon Plc v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2015] UKSC 37

Court: Supreme Court

Facts: The Upper Tribunal (UT) intervened and remade a decision from the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) after determining that the FTT had committed an error of law. Under section 12(2)(b)(ii) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, the UT is empowered to remake decisions made by the FTT where an error of law has occurred. The Court of Appeal, however, held that the Upper Tribunal had exceeded its appellate role by substituting its decision for that of the FTT.

Issue: Did the Upper Tribunal overstep its appellate authority by replacing the First Tier Tribunal’s decision with its own?

Held: Appeal allowed; the Upper Tribunal was justified in its intervention because the First Tier Tribunal had indeed erred in law.

Key Judicial Statements: Lord Carnwath noted that the Upper Tribunal had identified errors in the FTT’s decision-making process, making it “appropriate for them to exercise their power to remake the decision, making such factual and legal judgments as were necessary for the purpose.” He emphasized that while the UT was not bound by the FTT's findings, it respected them and based its conclusion on both legal principles and factual assessment. Lord Carnwath further criticized the Court of Appeal for concentrating on the FTT’s decision instead of evaluating the UT’s determination.

💡Leveluplaw: reinforces the Upper Tribunal’s authority to review and revise First Tier Tribunal decisions when legal errors are identified. It highlights the balance of power between the two tribunals and affirms that the Upper Tribunal can provide necessary guidance by reassessing findings of fact when errors of law are present, thus promoting consistency and clarity in tribunal decisions.