| Rio
Tinto Services Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (FCA)
- goods and services tax - acquisitions not for creditable purpose - input tax credit claims dismissed
|
| Tran v
Pu (FCA)
- bankruptcy - review of sequestration order - deed of settlement failure to
carry out de novo hearing - appeal
allowed - matter remitted
|
| Dimarti
v Dimarti (NSWSC) – contract of compromise – no unconscionable
conduct or unjust contract – application to set aside contract of compromise
dismissed
|
| Gibb v
Gibb (VSC) – testator’s family maintenance – solicitors’ duties
– misconceived application for removal of estate’s trustees dismissed –
adjournment to determine whether costs order to be made against solicitors
|
| Dean v
Collins (WASCA) – succession –dismissal of family provision
application – security for costs of appeal refused
|
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Rio Tinto Services Ltd v
Commissioner of Taxation
[2015] FCA 94
Federal
Court of Australia
Davies
J
Taxation
- goods and services tax - applicant was representative member for Rio Tinto
Ltd GST group - applicant claimed it was entitled to input tax credits for
acquisitions made by group members in providing and maintaining residential
accommodation by way of lease for workforce - Commissioner denied input tax
credit claims on basis they fell within terms of s11-15(2)(a) A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax)
Act 1999 (Cth) because they related to making supplies that would be input
taxed - held: acquisitions fell within terms of s11-15(2)(a) - acquisitions not
made for a creditable purpose -
application dismissed.
Rio Tinto Services Ltd
|
Tran v Pu [2015] FCA 97
Federal
Court of Australia
Beach
J
Bankruptcy
- appellant’s estate sequestrated pursuant to Registrar’s order - sequestration
order made on creditor’s petition filed by respondent - application for review
of sequestration order dismissed by Federal Circuit Court judge - primary judge
held deed of settlement was a bar to application for review - held: no private
contractual bar could foreclose proper application of s52 Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) - primary judge did not engage in task of
a rehearing de novo or engage in task
required under s52 - appeal allowed - matter remitted.
Tran
|
Dimarti v Dimarti [2015] NSWSC 97
Supreme
Court of New South Wales
Lindsay
J
Contract
of compromise – defendant sought orders that consent orders and underlying
agreement for compromise be set aside because they were procured by plaintiff’s
unconscionable conduct within meaning of ss20, 21 and 22 of the Australian
Consumer Law – defendant also contended contract for compromise was an unjust
contract within meaning of s7 Contracts
Review Act 1980 (NSW) – defendant contended his medical condition operated against
full participation in processes leading to entry of consent orders - held: no
unconscionable conduct – no unjust contract - defendant gave fully informed
consent to contract of compromise he entered and orders made by Court – motion
dismissed.
Dimarti
|
Gibb v Gibb [2015] VSC 35
Supreme
Court of Victoria
McDonald
J
Testator’s
family maintenance – solicitors’ duties - children of deceased by mother as
litigation guardian sought orders under Part IV Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) by reference to
deceased’s appointment of his parents to administer his estate – mother
concerned deceased’s parents would not make proper provision for maintenance of
children - held: no legal or factual basis upon which order could be made
pursuant to s48 Trustee Act 1958
(Vic) for removal of deceased’s parents as trustees of estate - relief sought
in originating motion misconceived - prima facie grounds on which Court might
be satisfied plaintiffs’ solicitors contravened overarching obligation under
ss18 & 24 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (Vic)
– proceedings adjourned to determine whether costs order should be made against
solicitors in interests of justice.
Gibb
|
Dean v Collins [2015] WASCA 28
Court
of Appeal of Western Australia
Murphy
JA
Security
for costs – succession – appellant sought family provision order under Family Provision Act 1972 (WASCA) in respect
of late mother’s Will – Master dismissed appellant’s application – appellant
appealed – respondents sought security for costs – held: Court not persuaded
security for costs should be ordered – appellant’s case arguable - Court not
persuaded appellant would be unable to meet adverse costs order – not
unreasonable for appellant not to have paid costs of primary proceedings where
there had been no taxation of costs below – not appropriate to have waited
until after parties filed respective cases before making assessment whether
security should be sought – application dismissed.
Dean
|
