.png)
.png)
The appellant was a Polish lorry driver. HMRC had issued him with an excise duty assessment and penalty.
He asked the First-tier Tribunal to direct that he be provided with free legal representation because he could not speak English and could not afford to pay for a lawyer of his choice.
The tribunal judge refused for several reasons. First she said that legal aid operated independently of the tribunal system and it was for the appellant to establish whether he was entitled to this help. Further, the tribunal had no power to order HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) to provide him with free representation outside the legal aid system.
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) gives a person charged with a criminal offence various rights, including ‘to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require’. The judge pointed out that the excise duty assessment was a civil matter and, although the penalty was ‘criminal’ for the purposes of the convention, it did not follow that the appellant was entitled to free legal representation. Instead, referring to Booth v CRC [2022] STC 1565 which involved a VAT penalty, he was entitled to a ‘fair’ hearing.
Finally, there was no reason to think that lack of legal representation would result in the appellant not having a fair hearing. The judge said the tribunal was used to hearing cases where the appellant did not have a lawyer, and took that into account. In addition, the HMCTS would provide free of charge a professional interpreter fluent in the Polish language for the appeal.
The appellant’s application was denied.
