Aoun Investments Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue

Aoun Investments Pty Ltd and another plaintiff, against the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue, brought an action before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The case revolved around the imposition of stamp duties on the transfer of strata lots, specifically whether these transfers were subject to a nominal duty as a partition under the Duties Act 1997. The plaintiffs argued that the consolidation of a lot into strata lots and the subsequent registration of these lots did not constitute a partition subject to stamp duty, as the plaintiffs held the lots in severalty rather than as joint tenants or tenants in common.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Real Property Act 1900 section 100(1) mandated that the plaintiffs must hold their interests in co-ownership to be deemed joint tenants and whether the Conveyancing Act 1919 section 26(1) implied that the plaintiffs held their interests as tenants in common by virtue of the consolidation instrument. The court needed to determine the nature of the plaintiffs' holdings and whether the consolidation process resulted in a deemed tenancy in common.

The court held that the Real Property Act 1900 did not require the plaintiffs to hold their interests in co-ownership to be deemed joint tenants. Furthermore, the court found that the Conveyancing Act 1919 did not deem the plaintiffs to hold their interests as tenants in common by the consolidation instrument. The consolidation and registration of the strata lots did not constitute a partition under the Duties Act 1997, and thus the plaintiffs were not required to pay stamp duty on the transfer of the strata lots. The court ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, concluding that the consolidation and registration did not create a joint tenancy or tenancy in common for the purposes of stamp duty.

The court ordered that the plaintiffs were not liable for the stamp duty imposed on the transfer of the strata lots, as the consolidation and registration process did not result in a partition. The Chief Commissioner of State Revenue's demand for stamp duty was therefore dismissed.