Home / Focus Alert /

FTT decision highlights ‘common-sense’ approach to the transit and exceptional circumstances exemptions

FTT decision highlights ‘common-sense’ approach to the transit and exceptional circumstances exemptions

Parker [2026] TC 09868

A recent First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decision (released 1 May 2026) has provided clarification on how the transit and exceptional circumstances exceptions operate within the Statutory Residence Test (SRT).

The appellant (MP), who was working overseas in Iraq with family in the UK, spent 100 days in the UK during the 2019–20 tax year. MP claimed 11 of those days should be disregarded under FA 2013, Sch. 45, thereby reducing his UK day count to 89 and qualifying him non-UK resident according to the third automatic overseas test.

HMRC challenged four of those days, bringing his UK day-count to 93 and therefore rendering him UK resident under the sufficient ties test.

MP’s employer had arranged return flights between Iraq and London. After arriving in London, he stayed overnight in a hotel near Heathrow airport before flying to Naples for a family holiday. Upon returning to London, he again stayed in a hotel near the airport and flew to Tokyo for a family holiday the day after arrival. He then flew back to Heathrow airport, staying in a nearby hotel with the intention of flying to Dublin the next day. MP checked in his luggage and boarded his flight for Dublin; that day, however, weather conditions caused by Storm Jorge were preventing flights from landing at Dublin Airport for some time. As such, MP disembarked, leaving his luggage checked in, and the airline arranged for him to fly out the following day with accommodation and food provided nearby.

HMRC argued that as MP did not have a single ticket covering his journey from Iraq to London, to Naples, to London and so forth, each arrival at Heathrow constituted a completed journey. Therefore, each time MP arrived in the UK, he was not doing so as a ‘passenger’ and the days spent in the UK were not exempt under the transit rules.

Furthermore, MP’s meeting with his wife and stepdaughter before continuing his travels with them was interpreted by HMRC to be substantially unrelated to his passage through the UK.

Lastly, it was asserted by HMRC that because MP had not left the UK the day after arrival owing to the cancellation of his flight to Dublin, neither that day nor the day before could be disregarded under the transit exemption. HMRC argued that adverse weather conditions did not constitute exceptional circumstances and that had he wished, he could himself have arranged to leave the UK on an earlier flight once the weather conditions had suitably improved.

The FTT found HMRC’s interpretation that a single journey cannot be undertaken via a multiplicity of tickets to be “arbitrary and not supported by the wording of the legislation”. They further found that his activities such as staying in accommodation near the airport, eating and

meeting with family members in preparation of travelling onward together were incidental and functionally related to transit.

Despite HMRC’s argument that adverse weather conditions are not exceptional, the FTT accepted MP’s assertion, supported by statistical evidence, that airport closures are. They also took a pragmatic approach to MP’s acceptance of the arrangements made for him by the airline – although he could in theory have left the UK earlier, they stated: ‘Ordinary societal expectations do not require a passenger, in the midst of significant disruption, to disregard airline arrangements, abandon checked in luggage, or attempt speculative alternative travel in order to demonstrate an intention to leave the UK as soon as those circumstances permit.’

The FTT findings constitute a ‘common sense’ approach to the application of the transit and exceptional circumstances exemptions, wherein reasonable behaviour standards are of more importance than technicalities. On these bases, the four days in question were considered eligible for exemption, thereby rendering the appellant non-UK resident in the 2019/20 tax year. The case further demonstrates the importance of diligence in the documentation of travel from an SRT perspective.

Whether HMRC decides to appeal the decision remains to be seen.

 

Giacomo Francioni

Patrick Jordan

  • Giacomo Francioni
Our Offices
Belluzzo International Partners is a multidisciplinary, international and independent professional boutique that provides consultancy in the areas of Wealth, Law, Tax, Finance.
A family business firm for business families