Active Sports Management Pty Ltd v Industry Innovation and Science Australia

Active Sports Management Pty Ltd (the applicant) appealed against the Administrative Appeals Tribunal's (the Tribunal) decision to affirm the respondent's determination that the applicant's activities were not "core R&D activities" within the meaning of s 355-25(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) (ITAA 1997). The applicant lodged applications for the registration of several activities relating to the development of a customised basketball shoe as "core R&D activities". The respondent determined that none of the activities satisfied the definition of "core R&D activities" and confirmed the determination on internal review. The Tribunal affirmed the internal review decision, and the applicant sought judicial review of the Tribunal's decision.

The court was required to decide whether the Tribunal erred by not considering or by failing to engage "meaningfully" with the applicant's submissions, whether the Tribunal failed to undertake a genuine independent consideration of the issues arising on the review and instead adopted the respondent's submissions, and whether the Tribunal misconstrued s 355-25(1) of the ITAA 1997. The court found that the Tribunal did not err in failing to consider the applicant's submissions in detail, as it was not required to set out a detailed refutation of the case put by the unsuccessful party. The Tribunal's reasons were coherent, logical and contained sufficient detail in terms of its references to the evidence on which its findings were based. The court also found that the Tribunal undertook a genuine independent consideration of the issues arising on the review and did not adopt the respondent's submissions. Finally, the court found that the Tribunal did not misconstrue s 355-25(1) of the ITAA 1997, as the contended error could not be material when the Tribunal found that the applicant had not established other required elements of the definition of "core R&D activities".

The court dismissed the appeal and ordered that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, as agreed or taxed.