Boulton v. Commissioner of Taxation

[2007] QCA 95

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Boulton v Commissioner of Taxation [2007] QCA 95

PARTIES:

WILLIAM-GRAHAM BOULTON
(appellant/applicant)
v
COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 9074 of 2006
DC No 122 of 2006

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Leave s118 DCA (Civil)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Townsville

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

29 March 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

29 March 2007

JUDGES:

Williams JA, Wilson and Douglas JJ
Judgment of the Court

ORDER:

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL-PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – WHEN APPEAL LIES – BY LEAVE OF COURT – GENERALLY – where applicant failed to lodge tax returns – where applicant convicted in Magistrates Court of three offences for contravention of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) – where applicant argued invalidity of appointment of Commissioner of Taxation on basis that Governor General invalidly appointed – where District Court Judge rejected applicant’s contention on appeal – whether leave to appeal should be granted

Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth), s 8C(1)(a)

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
S M Allen for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth) for the respondent

WILLIAMS JA:  After a hearing in the Magistrates Court at Townsville on the 8th of March 2006, the applicant was convicted of three offences in contravention of 8C(1)(a) of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) which respectively related to the failure to lodge Income Tax Returns for the financial years ended 30 June 2001, 2002 and 2003. He was fined $3,000 and ordered to pay costs of the Court.

The Applicant appeared for himself before the Magistrate and made various submissions contending that, inter-alia, the Commissioner of Taxation was not validly appointed because the Governor-General was not validly appointed.

He appealed against those convictions and the appeal was heard by Judge Pack in the District Court at Townsville on the 4th of September 2006.  He delivered extensive reasons on the 27th of September 2006 rejecting the various contentions of the Applicant.

The Applicant now seeks leave to appeal to this Court.  He indicated in oral submissions that there were three issues that he would agitate if leave was granted.

Firstly, that the decision of Judge Pack was affected by a threat or coercion which was implicit in a submission made to him by counsel for the Commissioner.  That submission was to the effect that if the Governor-General and the Governor of Queensland were not validly appointed, then it would follow that Judge Pack himself had not been validly appointed.  That would seem to be a logical extension of the applicant's submissions in the Magistrates Court and in the District Court.  Clearly, there is no substance in the allegation that the decision was affected by that coercive influence.

The second point that the Applicant would seek to agitate is that the summons which commanded him to appear before the Townsville Magistrates Court was invalid because the summons commanded him to appear at the Court "in her Majesty's name". That follows the form of a summons which appears in the schedule to the Justices Act.

The third point that the Applicant wishes to agitate is that the Magistrate who heard the matter should have disqualified herself for bias because prior to appointment as a Magistrate she had acted and appeared as a barrister in the north Queensland region.

Having considered the material before the Court, including the written submissions and the oral submissions made today, the Court is of the view that the Applicant has not demonstrated that there is any issue warranting the grant of leave to appeal to this Court.  In consequence, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

-----