Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Hi. Thank you for your question. My name is Jo and I will try to help with this. What is the case for, what organisation is involved and what unlawful information was used?
Hi Jo, The case is Cornwall Recruitment Limited and Adam Young versus the Gangmasters Licensing Appeals and Gangmasters Licensing Authority (GLA). The unlawful information came from HMRC's Enforcement & Insolvency department via the secure gateway and was used by the GLA as the primary evidence that HMRC was against our companies proposed pre-pack administration. I had argued in the Appeal that I had done everything correctly and had had a meeting with HMRC's Labour Provider Unit (LPU) on May 08 2012 at which time I was told they were fine with the pre-pack and that on commencement of trading we would have to provide a security bond. At our GLA licence inspection a member of the LPU was there and all this was discussed again. In the appeal however, the GLA inspector said he couldn't remember if the agreement was discussed or not. The GLA also argued in the appeal that I had made the meeting up and that they were not required to contact the Labour Provider Unit. HMRC document IDG51800 has the relevant information on lawful disclosure with the GLA. I have assumed that the GLA should know this. The Judge in the appeal was nice but said she had to make the decision based on the evidence from HMRC's Enforcement and Insolvency, as this was the GLA's case that the pre-pack did not have favour with HMRC. I had originally received the GLA's document bundle on 24 June 2013, the information above was sent to me on 1 August 2013, 28 days before the appeal. I did not know that they would use this as their primary evidence and as it was an appeal I couldn't call witnesses.