The High Court granted the Collector General of Revenue summary judgment for the full amounts claimed against Pauraig Kane and John Kane in proceedings over VAT assessments. The court said the assessments were final and conclusive after the defendants failed to comply with information precepts issued during their tax appeals and their solicitor later notified Revenue that they would not proceed with those appeals.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Kelly on 3 July 2009, covered two proceedings transferred to the Commercial List. Revenue claimed €5,271,004.07 from Pauraig Kane and €4,941,997.52 from John Kane, each amount alleged to be due in VAT arrears and interest.
The assessments followed a Revenue investigation into the defendants’ separate motor sales businesses, operated in Granard, County Longford. Revenue alleged tax irregularities, including that sales were wrongly recorded or not recorded and VAT was not accounted for. The court described those matters as background; its decision on summary judgment focused on events after the assessments were raised.
The defendants appealed the assessments. An Appeal Commissioner issued precepts requiring them to provide information by 21 September 2008. It was undisputed that neither defendant complied. A hearing was due to resume on 25 February 2009, but on the previous day their solicitor wrote to Revenue stating that both defendants wished not to proceed with their appeals.
The defendants later argued that their former solicitor lacked authority to withdraw the appeals. They also said they had not known that affidavits sworn on 25 May 2009 stated that they had instructed him to do so. Their former solicitor disputed that account in a letter, saying he had acted on their instructions and read the affidavits aloud to them before they were sworn.
Justice Kelly did not decide whether the solicitor had the defendants’ actual authority or whether their account was correct. He held that the statutory provisions meant the failure to comply with the precepts required dismissal of the appeals, leaving the assessments with the same effect as if no appeals had been lodged. He also held that the written withdrawal notice had the statutory effect of an agreement that the assessments should stand, and that the solicitor had ostensible authority to give it on the defendants’ behalf.
The court found no triable issue or arguable defence and granted judgment for the full amounts claimed. The ruling did not determine the truth of the defendants’ disputed allegations about their solicitor’s authority.