UK Court Addresses the Interpretation of Personal Data in a Data Protection case for the first time

Personal data is a concept we all know but we all seem to have different interpretations of. What exactly does it mean? And how does the law interpret it? The UK court, for the first time, was asked to determine the interpretation of the meaning of “personal data” as a preliminary issue in a data protection case, without related defamation claims.

Background

This High Court case involves two former senior executives of the XIO Group who were suing the Wall Street Journal for data protection violations related to them seeking the removal of two articles published in 2017 and 2018.

The first article detailed a civil claim by Chinese billionaire Xie Zhikun, who accused the executives of conspiring to defraud him of nearly $1 billion. The second article questioned the transparency of XIO’s acquisition of JD Power. The claimants argue that the articles contain misleading personal data that harms their reputations and affects their ability to secure funding for their investment business.

They also assert that the continued publication of the articles breaches UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, and are seeking damages. The court has rejected the defendant’s argument that the claim is a disguised defamation case and will hold a hearing to address two preliminary issues: the nature of the personal data in the articles and whether it constitutes criminal offence data under EU regulations.

Legal Framework and Court’s Decision

The court applied the approach in the case NT1 v Google LLC [2018] EWHC 799 (QB), utilised the ‘single meaning rule’ to determine the meaning of the data, and the ‘repetition rule’, which is an established principle in defamation law, to assess the inference meaning.

The Court stressed that it should be applied in the consideration of data protection claims to interpret law consistently and fairly. In the judgement, the court clarified the interpretation of personal data, concluding that the news articles implied that Xie Zhikun had initiated a civil lawsuit against XIO executives for conspiracy to defraud him, and that one of the claimants was receiving undisclosed profits from the alleged fraud.

The court then considered ‘criminal offence data’ under the UK GDPR and in accordance with Article 10 of Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679, It found that the articles reported allegations from civil proceedings, indicating that the true situation was unclear. As a result, the court ruled that the personal data of the claimants did not qualify as ‘criminal offence data’ under Article 10, meaning the stricter protections for processing such data under the UK GDPR were not applicable. This decision clarifies the limits of what constitutes ‘relating to’ criminal convictions or offenses.

Conclusion

The implication of this judgement is profound: it establishes a way for claimants to pursue data protection claims to address reputational harm without needing to demonstrate ‘serious harm’ as required by the Defamation Act 2013. However, this also poses risks as it may allow personal data claims to bypass the stricter defamation law requirements, potentially undermining freedom of expression. Publication of public interest with unproven criminal allegations or settled civil cases will need to be justified, as failure to do so may lead to personal data claims even after defamation claim limitations have expired.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Tammina v SSHD – Exploring the Fairness of Sponsor Licence Revocation

Many migrants in the UK hold work visas, with their immigration status heavily reliant on their employer’s sponsorship eligibility. If an employer’s sponsor licence is revoked, affected employees have limited time to address their immigration status, creating significant uncertainty. Protecting their rights and interests in such situations is a matter of widespread concern.

The case we’re discussing today, Tammina and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD), serves as a crucial example for migrants facing sponsorship-related issues and explores the boundaries of procedural fairness in immigration law.

Background of Tammina v SSHD

Mr Rajasekhar Tammina, the appellant, arrived in the UK in 2008, holding various visas, including a Tier 2 (General) work visa sponsored by Ratna Marble and Granites. His wife, Vinoda, held leave as a dependent of his Tier 2 visa.

On March 1, 2017, the appellant applied for a Tier 2 visa extension, but a Home Office compliance visit in June questioned his job’s authenticity and whether it met the necessary occupational standards. As a result, Mr. Tammina’s extension application was refused on July 20, 2017, and his employment ended.

While Mr. Tammina pursued a judicial review of the refusal decision, the SSHD suspended Ratna’s sponsorship licence on October 20, 2017, and later revoked it on December 22, 2017. However, Mr. Tammina was not informed of this revocation until February 8, 2018, when the SSHD reconsidered and ultimately refused his application on the basis that his COS had been invalidated.

Challenging this decision, Mr. Tammina argued that the SSHD’s failure to notify him of the revocation deprived him of the opportunity to take remedial action, such as finding a new sponsor, citing R (Pathan) v SSHD [2020] UKSC 41(“Pathan”).

Court Judgment on Tammina v SSHD

The Court mainly assessed whether the SSHD’s failure to promptly notify Mr. Tammina of his employer’s licence revocation constituted procedural unfairness.

The Appellant raised many grounds of appeals, some of which were heard in closed hearing and others in open hearing.

The Court held the following in relation to some of the arguments presented by claimants:

Procedural Unfairness

The court examined whether the SSHD’s decision making process was unfair. The appellants argued that the SSHD’s decision-making process was unfair because Mr. Tammina was not informed of his sponsor’s licence revocation before his application was refused. This deprived him of a chance to seek an alternative sponsor. The SSHD disagreed and maintained that Mr. Tammina had ample time to address his situation and find an alternative solution.

The court emphasized that procedural fairness requires the Secretary of State to inform an applicant of their sponsor’s licence revocation promptly, but this requirement may be mitigated if the applicant already has prior knowledge of the issues.

Reliance on Pathan Precedent

The appellants argue that their case was identical to Pathan precedent, where the Supreme Court ruled that failing to notify an applicant of their sponsor’s revocation was unfair and placed them at a disadvantage. The SSHD argued that Mr. Tammina’s case was different from Pathan because he was aware of the issues surrounding his sponsor’s compliance before the licence was revoked. Unlike in Pathan, Mr. Tammina knew that his employer’s licence had been suspended, and he had discussed the issue with his employer. Thus, he was not taken by surprise.

The court stated that Mr. Tammina had prior knowledge of the investigation into the sponsor licence and had the chance to take proactive steps, especially when the revocation was partly based on concerns about Mr. Tammina’s role, meaning he was not an innocent bystander but involved in the circumstances that led to the decision.

Consequently, the court distinguished between Pathan and the present case, concluding that there was no obligation on the SSHD to notify appellants of the revocation under these circumstances.

The tribunal finally held, among other things, that Mr. Tammina was not treated unfairly by the SSHD. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Our comments

This case emphasises the principle that procedural fairness is highly context dependent. Procedural fairness is not an absolute right but rather one that must be assessed based on circumstances. While Pathan set an important legal precedent, it does not apply universally to all sponsorship revocation cases. Prior knowledge of an employer’s compliance issues can mitigate the need for immediate notification.

The judgment signals the responsibility of visa holders to remain informed about their employer’s compliance status and to seek alternative options promptly. While the Home Office would not be obligated to notify every affected employee when a sponsor loses its licence if the employee was aware of prior compliance concerns, employers and sponsored employees should keep transparent also communication about compliance risks.

Whether you are a sponsor employer or a sponsored employee, should you need any advice on monitoring the sponsor’s status and planning contingencies, please do not hesitate to contact Lisa’s law Immigration team. Our experienced team would be happy to assist you.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Understanding the Help to Buy Redemption Process

The Help to Buy scheme has provided many first-time buyers with the opportunity to step onto the property ladder. However, as circumstances change, many homeowners find themselves needing to repay their Help to Buy equity loan, a process known as Help to Buy redemption. If you’re considering redeeming your Help to Buy loan, this guide outlines the key steps involved and how a solicitor can assist you.

Help to Buy redemption refers to the repayment of the equity loan provided by the government under the Help to Buy scheme. This repayment can occur either when you sell your property or when you decide to repay the loan without selling. The amount you repay is based on the market value of your property at the time of redemption, not the amount initially borrowed.

Key Steps in the Help to Buy Redemption Process

1. Obtain a Market Valuation

The first step in the redemption process is obtaining an independent market valuation of your property. This valuation must be carried out by a Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) accredited surveyor. The valuation report is valid for three months and forms the basis for calculating the amount you need to repay.

2. Submit the Valuation to Help to Buy

Once you have the valuation report, it must be submitted to Help to Buy. Along with the valuation, you’ll need to complete and submit a redemption application form.

3. Receive the Redemption Figure

Help to Buy will review the valuation and provide you with a redemption figure. This figure includes the percentage of the property’s market value that corresponds to your equity loan, as well as any applicable fees and charges.

4. Appoint a Solicitor

A solicitor is required to handle the legal aspects of the redemption process. They will liaise with Help to Buy, prepare the necessary documents, and ensure the repayment is completed smoothly. If you’re re-mortgaging to fund the redemption, your solicitor will also work with your mortgage lender.

5. Arrange Payment

Once the redemption figure is agreed upon, your solicitor will arrange for the repayment of the loan. This may involve transferring funds from a remortgage, personal savings or sale of your property. The solicitor will also handle any outstanding fees payable to Help to Buy.

6. Obtain Confirmation

After the payment is made, Help to Buy will confirm the redemption of your Help to Buy loan and remove their charge from the property’s title at the Land Registry.

Common Challenges and How to Overcome Them

Valuation Disputes: If you disagree with the redemption figure based on the valuation, you may request a review or provide additional evidence to support your case.
Time Constraints: The valuation report is valid for only three months. If the process is delayed, you may need to obtain a new valuation, which can incur additional costs.
Legal Complexity: The redemption process involves various legal and financial steps. Working with an experienced conveyancing solicitor ensures that all requirements and timeline are met, minimising stress and potential errors.

An experienced residential conveyancing solicitor’s role is to simplify the redemption process and ensure a successful outcome. By understanding the steps and seeking professional guidance, you can confidently manage your Help to Buy redemption and take the next step in your property journey.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

How Can Leaseholders Extend Their Lease?

While leaseholders may ostensibly feel like homeowners, the nature of a lease means that the property will return to the freeholder at the end of the lease unless renewed. The potential for lease extension is therefore vital in order to protect the valuation of their property.

In this guide to lease extension, we examine how leaseholders can extend their lease.

Who can request an extension?

Any tenant who holds a long lease in a flat can make such a request. If there are two or more long leases (say one is 25 years, granted out of a longer lease of 50 years, which was further granted out of a even longer lease of 90 years) in the same flat, all the leaseholders can make such request, with the occupational tenant or the one who is close to the occupational tenant having the priority right.

If a flat forms part of a block of flats which is under a long lease, the leasehold of the flat can request for an extension of the lease for the whole block.

How long can a tenant request for the new lease to be?

A tenant can currently renew a lease by 90 years, in addition to the unexpired residue term (time remaining) of the current lease. Once section 33 of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 is brought into effect, this will be increased to 990 years.

What is classed as a long lease?

A long lease is one which is:

granted for a term of more than 21 years, regardless of any right to forfeit, break, etc
granted for a shorter term but with a right for perpetual renewal
terminable on death, marriage or civil partnership (ie a lease taking effect under section 149(6) of the Law of Property Act 1925), although there are special rules for determining whether in any particular case such a lease meets the definition of a long tenancy
terminable on an unknown date (i.e. a lease containing a so-called ‘Prince of Wales clause’)
granted under the right to buy provisions (Part V of the Housing Act 1985) or pursuant to the (now abolished) right to acquire on rent-to-mortgage terms
which is a shared ownership lease and the tenant’s share is 100%, or
granted pursuant to the right to buy which is enjoyed by certain tenants of registered social landlords

How much will the rent for the new lease be?

When a lease is renewed, it will have to be a peppercorn (very low, symbolic value such as £1 per year). However, the tenant will need to pay a premium for such a new lease. Furthermore, the tenant will continue to pay the rent under the terms of the existing lease for the residue term.

When is lease extension not possible?

In some circumstances, it may not be possible to extend a lease. This includes situations such as where:

The flat has been let by a charitable housing trust for the purposes of its charitable functions
The lease is a business tenancy protected by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) (for more information, see Practice Note: LTA 1954 business lease renewal—termination)
The lease was granted by sub-demise out of a superior lease other than a long lease, the grant was made in breach of the terms of the superior lease, and there has been no waiver of the breach by the superior landlord
The property is held by the Crown, although the Crown has undertaken to allow enfranchisement on the same terms as the Land Registration Act 1967 unless the land is within an excepted area, in which case a lease extension will usually be granted—see the Crown Estate policy and guidance papers for further information
The property is vested inalienably in the National Trust, or
The property is within the precinct of a cathedral church
In certain circumstances where the lease is coming to an end, including where ‘any proceedings are pending to enforce a right of re-entry or forfeiture terminating [the] lease of the flat’, except with leave of the court. Leave will only be granted if the court is satisfied that the claim is not being made to avoid the consequences of the breach for which the landlord is forfeiting

What do leaseholders need to take into account when extending a lease?

Valuation

Although a formal valuation is not required, it is strongly advisable for a tenant to obtain valuation advice as to the likely premium and other amounts payable before serving a section 42 notice so that the likely costs are known before embarking upon the statutory process.

A valuation will also inform the decision as to the proposed premium to be inserted in the notice of claim.

Finance

The tenant will need to ensure that they have the necessary finance in place to be able to pay the premium (payable on completion) and the statutory deposit (which is payable to the landlord within 14 days of request at any time following service of the notice of claim).

The deposit payable is the greater of £250 or 10% of the figure for the premium specified in the notice of claim (see below: Deposit, deducing title and access).

Information

It is essential, before embarking upon the statutory process of lease extension, to identify the freeholder and any intermediate landlords.

Requesting an up-to-date ground rent or service charge demand to identify the immediate landlord’s details can be the first step in this process.

An index map search or a search through one of the National Land Information Service (NLIS) channels should reveal the freeholder and intermediate leasehold interests. However, if there are unregistered titles specific enquiries may need to be made of the known landlords.

s. 41 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 provides that the tenant may serve notices requiring information to be provided.

What is the process of making a leasehold request?

1. The qualifying tenant can make a claim by serving a section 42 notice on a competent landlord who can be the immediate or other superior landlords who is able to grant the lease required.

2. With 2 months of receipt of the section 42 notice, the landlords should serve a section 45 counter notice to the tenant, to either admit or decline the request. If the landlord wants to decline the claim, they need to apply to the County Court for a declaration that the tenant has no right to make such a claim within two months of serving the counter notice.

3. If the landlord admits the section 42 claim, the parties will negotiate the terms of the new lease. If they cannot agree with them within two months of the service of the counter notice, an application can be made to the first-tier tribunal for the Court to decide on the terms.

4. Once the terms are determined, the parties can then draft a new lease on the terms.

Is informal lease extension negotiation possible?

Of course! Tenants and landlords can always talk to each other and reach agreements on the premium and terms of new leases without following the above procedure. In most cases, informal negotiation can come out as a cheaper and faster way to resolve the relevant issues.

Final thoughts

Lease extension is a complicated topic, and at a time when reform to the system is expected, leaseholders may not be sure about whether to extend their lease or wait for further legislation to become law. This may be particularly true if your lease is nearing the 80-year point, when “marriage value” kicks in.

For expert advice, including lease extension, contact our conveyancing team today.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

An Overview of Litigation in the UK

Litigation in the UK refers to the legal process of resolving disputes through the court system. It can involve individuals, businesses, or public bodies and is divided into civil and criminal proceedings.

However, those not familiar with litigation may be confused by the litigation process, sometimes preventing them from even engaging with it in the first place. Let’s take a look at how it works.

The Litigation Process

1. Pre-Action Stage

Before court proceedings begin, the parties are usually required to follow a pre-action protocol, which includes exchanging information and attempting to settle the dispute. This helps resolve matters without the need for litigation.

2. Issuing a Claim

If settlement efforts fail, the claimant (the person bringing the case) files a claim form with the appropriate court. In civil cases, this is often done in the County Court or High Court, depending on the claim’s complexity and value.

3. Defence and Case Management

The defendant has a set period to respond. If they dispute the claim, both sides will exchange further evidence, including witness statements and expert reports. The court will manage the case by setting deadlines and procedural steps.

4. Trial and Judgment

If the case proceeds to trial, both sides present their arguments before a judge. After considering the evidence, the judge delivers a judgment, which may include financial compensation or other legal remedies.

5. Enforcement and Appeals

If the losing party does not comply with the judgment, enforcement measures can be taken, such as seizing assets or obtaining a court order. If a party is dissatisfied with the outcome, they may seek an appeal, but this is only granted in certain circumstances.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Before or during litigation, parties may opt for ADR methods, such as mediation or arbitration, which can save time and costs compared to a full court trial. This involves resolving disputes without going to court.

Conclusion

Litigation in the UK follows a structured process designed to ensure fairness and justice. However, court proceedings can be lengthy and expensive, making early settlement or ADR attractive alternatives in many cases.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Refugees to be excluded from gaining British citizenship?

By Angel Wan

Without prior announcement, the Home Office has updated its guidance on the good character requirement for nationality applications submitted from 10 February 2025 onwards. Under the new guidance, individuals who entered the United Kingdom illegally will generally be refused British citizenship.

This applies to anyone who made a “dangerous journey” – arriving in the United Kingdom without a valid visa or Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA), regardless of when the illegal entry occurred.

This marks a significant departure from the previous guidance, where a citizenship application would only generally be refused if the illegal entry occurred within the past ten years.

The term ‘dangerous journey’ includes arrivals via small boats, concealment in vehicles, or other conveyance methods, explicitly excluding those who arrived on commercial airlines. Crucially, this policy extends to individuals who have been granted refugee status.

Exceptions to this rule appear to be extremely limited. The Home Office has provided only one example in its guidance concerning refugees:

A person who entered illegally 14 years ago would normally require refusal of citizenship as an illegal entrant but has been recognised as a victim of trafficking and subsequently granted refugee status. They haven’t acquired any other notable adverse character issues during their residency, indicative that on a balance of probabilities they are now of good character

Nationality policy – good character.docx (p.56)

Final thoughts

Given the high cost of naturalisation applications and the inability to appeal against a refusal, this policy change is likely to deter a significant number of refugees from applying for British citizenship.

Finally, it is important to note that even nationality applications submitted before the 10 February 2025 deadline but still awaiting a decision will be reviewed under this new framework. The Home Office will assess whether illegal entry should be considered when determining an applicant’s good character.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

High Court Rules in Favour of Mother and Child in ‘No Recourse to Public Funds’ Case Against Coventry City Council

On 07 January 2025, the High Court quashed an assessment made by Coventry City Council in a ‘no recourse to public funds’ case and ordered the authority to re-take the decision. They urged the Council to take into account why the children concerned were held to not have any unmet welfare needs given the updated evidence involved.

The case was brought on behalf of the child, LR, by her mother and litigation friend, LC.

The judge in the case stated that the case concerned “some of the poorest families in our community”, who had no access to the mainstream benefits and housing systems due to their restricted immigration status.

Facts of the case

LC is a national of Nigeria who separated from her husband in 2023 due to domestic abuse. She submitted an application to the Home Office for leave to remain in November 2023. The application is still pending at the Home Office.

The family received accommodation, bus passes and cash from Coventry City Council, with a weekly support of £196.72 per week for the four members.

When LC first applied in May 2023 for support, Coventry City Council initially placed her and her three children in emergency accommodation in a hotel and provided the family with £135 per week and travel vouchers to and from school.

In January 2024, LR’s solicitors wrote to Coventry seeking higher payments, pointing out that £135 was well below the revised Asylum Support figure of £49.18 per person per week, which would give the £196.72 figure.

Legal issues

The case looked at several legal aspects including statutory interpretation, the inter-relationship between statutory schemes, the lawfulness of a local authority’s policy of support to affected families and the lawfulness of an assessment of need in one individual family’s case.

Judgement

It was held that it was unlawful for Coventry City Council to fix support levels under s.17 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA) at the same rate as Asylum Support. The court quashed an assessment made by Coventry City Council in a ‘no recourse to public funds’ case and ordered the authority to re-take the decision taking into account why the children concerned were held to not have any unmet welfare needs given the updated evidence involved.

Next steps

The defendant can appeal the decision, but if the defendant decides not to appeal, then the new assessment must be conducted promptly to ensure the claimant family receive the appropriate support.

Based on the way that the judgment is written, I would be surprised if the defendant decides to appeal the decision.

My view

I hope that following this decision, all public bodies will not lose sight of the human aspect of life for all families in this difficult circumstance.

I think the assessment conducted by the local authority must be done on a case-by-case basis. They must consider the overall welfare of the children and not be restricted by the narrow interpretation of safeguarding concerns.

I think that all local authorities in the UK must ensure that support provided under s.17 ChA is adequate to meet the welfare needs of children regardless of the immigration status of the parents.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Taxpayer Fined After Relying on AI Legal Arguments in her Tax Appeal

Artificial intelligence is now a simple fact of many people’s every day life. However, one UK taxpayer recently found out that relying on AI without verifying the credibility of its information can be risky. In the case of Harber v HMRC [2023] UKFTT 1007 (TC), the UK tax tribunal explored the dangers of using AI legal arguments. It also set out how it deals with capital gains tax (CGT) penalties and the limits of a “reasonable excuse” defence.

The Tax Penalty and Appeal

The Appellant, Ms Harber, sold a property but did not properly inform HMRC about her CGT liability. HMRC then penalised her £3,265.11 for failing to report it. She appealed, claiming she had reasonable excuses due to her mental health and lack of awareness of the tax rules.

In her submission, she presented nine tribunal decisions to support her argument. Each decision involved detailed case name, case date, and summary, all concerning taxpayers who had succeeded with similar defences. As illustration, here are two such summaries submitted by Ms Harber:

“Milner v HMRC’ (2020): The taxpayer successfully appealed against a penalty for late filing of a tax return on the basis of ignorance of the law requirements. The taxpayer argued that they had not been aware of the requirement to file a tax return as they had not received any correspondence from HMRC. The First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) found in their favour.”

“Oyesanya v HMRC’ (2020): In this case, the taxpayer successfully appealed against a penalty for late filing of a tax return. The taxpayer argued that they had a reasonable excuse for the late filing due to their mental health condition, which had prevented them from being able to manage their affairs effectively. The First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) found in their favor.”

But there was one major problem in Ms Harber’s submission – incredibly, none of those nine cases relied on by Ms Harber actually existed.

Fake Cases Generated by AI

When HMRC tried to locate the cases Harber cited in official legal databases, it found nothing. The tribunal’s own search revealed the same result: the cases were seemingly fake. They appeared to be generated by AI.

When questioned, Ms Harber said she got them from “a friend in a solicitor’s office.” She also admitted she did not know how to verify the cases on official websites like on the published decision site of the First-tier Tax Tribunal, or on BAILII which listed UK court decisions.

Although the fake cases did not change the outcome, the tribunal took the matter seriously. It warned that relying on AI-generated legal references without proper checks is dangerous, especially in formal proceedings.

Reasons for Dismissing the Appeal

Coming back to the case itself, the tribunal decided that Ms Harber had no valid excuse for failing to notify HMRC of her tax liability. It noted she was able to handle the property sale, work with solicitors, and set aside money for tax. If she could do all that, she could have contacted HMRC or a professional tax adviser. The tribunal also rejected her claim that ignorance of the law was a defence. She had already contacted HMRC about rental income rules in the past, and she also knew she had made a capital gain. The tribunal concluded that any reasonable taxpayer in her position would have asked for advice instead of waiting for HMRC to contact her.

Her appeal was dismissed, and the penalty remained in place.

Key Takeaway

AI cannot replace proper legal research or professional advice. This Tax Tribunal case showed that AI can be useful, but it should never be trusted blindly. Relying on unverified AI-generated information is a recipe for trouble.

As AI technology continues to evolve, it will play a larger role in every industry, including law. Still, caution is crucial. Anyone involved in a dispute should verify all legal references through official sources. They should also seek guidance from qualified professionals before presenting arguments to a court or tribunal. AI offers speed and convenience, yet it lacks the human judgment needed to interpret and confirm complex legal issues.

At Lisa’s Law, we understand the importance of accurate, thorough, and timely legal support. Our team of experienced solicitors and legal specialists can help you navigate complex disputes, research authoritative case law, and ensure your arguments are backed by verifiable sources.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Who Pays Business Rates, the Landlord or Tenant?

During my practice in commercial property transactions, clients including commercial property landlords, tenants, and business owners often raise questions around the topic of Business Rates. But what are Business Rates? How are they calculated? Who is responsible for paying these, landlord or tenant? Or someone else relevant? Today, let us discuss these questions with the hope of providing some insight to those individuals affected.

What are Business Rates and how are they calculated?

Business rates are a tax for businesses that occupy commercial properties. The amount you pay is based on the rateable value. The government uses a specific formula to calculate how much you owe each year.

Rateable value is like an estimate of how much rent a commercial property could earn if it were rented out, namely its open market rental value. This value is set by a government agency called the Valuation Office Agency (VOA). The formula of VOA’s calculation is open information so you can easily find on the gov.uk website. I enclose the link if you are interested in the formula details: Valuation Office Agency – GOV.UK.

One thing to note is that the rateable value is checked and updated from time to time. If you think your rateable value is too high, you can ask the VOA to review it.

There are also some ways to lower your business rates, like small business rate relief. If you are a business owner, it’s worth checking to see if you qualify for these discounts. Similarly, I attach the link on business rates relief for reference here: Business rates relief: Types of business rates relief – GOV.UK.

Who Pays Business Rates?

Usually, the occupier of the business premises is responsible for paying these rates. It could be the owner, the tenant, or even a sub-lessee, depending on who occupies the property. This should be clearly stated in the lease agreement, or any other sub-lease or contract of occupation you sign. As a tenant or sub-tenant, it is important to read your lease or agreement carefully and if in doubt, to seek advice from a professional on the relevant terms. These terms should explain whether you have to pay business rates and if there are any limits on how much they can go up.

Sometimes, especially in certain types of leases, the landlord pays the business rates but will charge you for them later through rent or service charges. Again, make sure you understand your lease terms clearly on those terms.

In some cases that we had dealt with, it turned out the sub-tenant was the actual liable party to pay the business rates as they were the true occupier of the business premises, whilst the tenant was not.

What are the other scenarios of the liability to pay?

Besides the sub-tenant scenario I have mentioned, it is also possible where multiple tenants share a property, the landlord might take responsibility for the business rates of common areas. These expenses are subsequently recovered through service charges. In other situations, landlord and tenant may negotiate business rate responsibilities by fixed rate terms or percentage terms, as part of the lease agreements.

As business rates are collected by the local council, if you happen to be the tenant, or occupier of the business property, and are responsible to pay for the business rates, it would be a good idea to keep in contact with the council to stay informed about what you owe and any changes that might happen. And if there is any issue or changes on the premises, please do communicate with the council officer as soon as possible to avoid delay in actions which may cause unnecessary costs or dispute.

Final thoughts

Finally, I would like to remind you that when the business premises becomes vacant, the liability for business rates may change. If the tenants leave but retain the lease without formally surrendering it, they remain responsible to pay business rates. It may also be the case that the tenant vacates without continuation, or the lease ends, then the landlord becomes liable to pay.

The conclusion of who pays business rates, tenant or landlord, is essentially based on occupancy and lease terms. Every case is different depending on the specific lease terms. Understanding your lease and your responsibilities regarding business rates is important for both landlord and tenant. It can save you money and help avoid surprises later. If you are unsure, do get professional advice when finalising a lease or dealing with property issues. With our expertise in commercial properties, we are able to provide advice on these type of commercial lease terms to suit your business needs.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Major Change to the UK Work Visa Sponsorship Guidelines

The UK government has recently updated its guidance for work sponsors. The changes focus particularly on the practice of employers passing certain costs onto employees. With millions of foreign workers in the UK, the changes are set to have a significant impact on work visa sponsorship.

What do employers have to pay for?

When employers sponsor foreign workers, they incur various costs, including:

Employer sponsorship licence application fees and associated administrative costs
Certificate of Sponsorship fee
Immigration Skills Charge
Skilled worker visa application fee
Immigration Health Surcharge

Employers must now cover the following costs themselves

Previously, due to the high costs involved, many employers required employees to cover these expenses or to recoup some of these costs if they left their job before their sponsorship period ended. This practice led to worker exploitation, particularly in the care sector, where employees felt financially trapped in poor working conditions.

On November 28, 2024, the UK Immigration Minister announced stricter rules to prevent this issue. From December 31, 2024, employers must cover the following costs themselves and cannot require employees to pay or reimburse them:

Employer sponsorship licence application fees and associated administrative costs
Certificate of Sponsorship fee
Immigration Skills Charge

Some expenses must still be paid by employees

While employers are no longer allowed to pass on the above three costs, some expenses may still be reasonably paid by employees, including:

Skilled worker visa application fee and Immigration Health Surcharge (as these directly benefit the employee)
Associated administrative costs on assignment of a Certificate of Sponsorship or visa application (such as priority service or legal costs, depending on the specific situation)

Employers must also follow employment law when seeking reimbursement from employees. Any clawback agreement must be fair, and employers cannot unreasonably demand repayment—especially if the worker loses their job due to company-wide layoffs. Employers must ensure they comply with the new rules. Any violation could result in revocation of their sponsor licence.

Employees should be aware of their rights and should not be forced to pay costs that employers are required to cover.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Have a question? Our friendly and experienced team are here to help.

Subscribe to our newsletter

We post weekly articles covering a variety of topics, including immigration, property, and more, so subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates.