Bennelong Medical Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (No

The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory heard an appeal by Bennelong Medical Pty Ltd against an order refusing it leave to be represented by an authorised officer in substantive proceedings. The Commissioner of Taxation, the respondent, sought to have the appeal declared incompetent and the notice of appeal struck out.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the appeal against the decision refusing leave to be represented was competent, and if so, whether leave to appeal should be granted. This involved considering the nature of the decision under appeal, specifically whether it was an interlocutory decision for which leave to appeal was required.

The Court determined that the appeal was incompetent. It reasoned that an appeal from a decision refusing leave to represent a company under rule 30(4)(b) of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) is an interlocutory decision and therefore requires leave to appeal. As leave had not been sought or granted, the appeal could not proceed. The Court further indicated that even if leave had been applied for, it would have been refused, citing the lack of clarity in the appellant's claim, the potential legal complexity, the appellant's inability to conduct the case in an orderly fashion without a solicitor, and the absence of evidence of financial constraint.

Consequently, the Court declared the appeal incompetent and struck out the notice of appeal. Bennelong Medical Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application.