Why tribunal decisions matter for live claims
The First-tier Tribunal is not bound by its own previous decisions, but in practice the same panel members often sit and consistent reasoning tends to emerge. When HMRC opens a compliance check and points to a tribunal decision, it is signalling the evidentiary bar the officer believes must be cleared. Understanding that case and the facts that drove its outcome helps practitioners frame their response accurately.
The cases below are drawn from the verified case record. They cover the main recurring disputes: technological uncertainty, the competent professional standard, subsidised expenditure, and cost documentation.
Hadee Engineering Co Ltd v HMRC ([2020] UKFTT 497 (TC))
Hadee Engineering lost its R&D claim in 2020. The tribunal found that the company had not demonstrated scientific or technological uncertainty at the outset of the projects claimed. A key finding was that the technical work described was within the routine capability of engineers working in the field, placing it on the cosmetic side of the cosmetic/substantive uncertainty line. The Upper Tribunal upheld HMRC's position in 2022 ([2022] UKUT 84 (TCC)). This case is frequently cited when HMRC challenges the uncertainty narrative in an AIF.
Quinn (London) Limited v HMRC ([2021] UKFTT 437 (TC))
Quinn (London) won approximately £1 million in disputed R&D credits in 2021. The tribunal accepted the company's account of the technical challenges it faced in its construction-related software and found genuine uncertainty that required systematic investigation. The Quinn decision is useful precedent for companies in sectors where the technical work is less obviously research-facing, because the tribunal engaged in detail with what the company's technical staff actually did rather than applying a sector-level presumption.
Get Onbord Ltd (in liquidation) v HMRC ([2024] UKFTT 617 (TC))
Get Onbord won its appeal in July 2024. The case involved software development where HMRC had challenged the technological uncertainty. The tribunal found in favour of the taxpayer and accepted that the uncertainty was genuine. The 2024 decision is notable because it post-dates the introduction of the Additional Information Form requirement and confirms that the tribunal will still engage with the technical merits rather than treating process failures as automatically fatal.
Collins Construction Ltd v HMRC ([2024] UKFTT 951 (TC))
Collins Construction won in October 2024 on a question of subsidised expenditure under the merged scheme. The case clarifies how cost-recovery arrangements between a contractor and its client are characterised, and when they reduce the qualifying base rather than excluding the expenditure entirely. This is an important case for companies that undertake R&D under commercial contracts.
Common mistakes when citing tribunal authority
A frequent error is relying on summaries of cases without reading the underlying decision. Case summaries written by advisers sometimes omit fact-specific findings that distinguish the case from the situation at hand. A second error is citing a taxpayer win as establishing a broad principle when the tribunal's reasoning was tied closely to specific evidence. The R&D tribunal cases index on this site covers the verified case record in more detail.
For an independent view on whether your claim would withstand the scrutiny these cases describe, the free assessment can help.