Bondi Beachside Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue

Bondi Beachside Pty Ltd and others (the appellants) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of Gzell J concerning the assessment of stamp duty. The dispute centred on whether a deed of variation, which extended the time for payment of principal and capitalised interest, constituted an "advance" for the purposes of section 206(a)(iii) of the *Duties Act 1997* (NSW).

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was to determine the proper interpretation of "advance" within the context of section 206(a)(iii) of the *Duties Act 1997* (NSW). This involved considering whether the deed of variation, by deferring the repayment of existing debt and capitalised interest, fell within the definition of an advance that would attract further stamp duty.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that an advance, in the context of the *Duties Act 1997* (NSW), typically involves the provision of new funds or credit. It found that the deed of variation merely restructured an existing debt and did not involve the provision of new money or credit by the lender to the borrower. Therefore, it did not constitute an advance for the purposes of the Act. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of the first instance court and entering judgment for the appellants. The cross-appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was ordered to pay the appellants' costs.