Bramley v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue

Bramley was a prospective home buyer who applied for a first home owner grant under the First Home Owners Boost Act 2008. The Chief Commissioner of State Revenue refused the application on the basis that the property for which the grant was sought was not a new home, but rather a renovated property. Bramley sought judicial review of this decision in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court had to decide whether the property in question was a 'new home' as defined by the Act. The definition of 'new home' in the Act was ambiguous, and the court considered whether the property met the ordinary meaning of 'new'. The court also considered whether there were any relevant legislative history or policy considerations that could assist in interpreting the definition.

The court found that the property was a 'new home' as it was being built for the first time and had never been occupied or used as a residence before. The court rejected the Commissioner's argument that the property was not 'new' because it was a renovation. The court found that the ordinary meaning of 'new' did not require the property to be completely new, but rather that it had not been previously used as a residence. The court also found that the legislative history and policy considerations supported this interpretation. Accordingly, the court set aside the Commissioner's decision and substituted its own decision to approve the applicant's application for a first home owner grant.