Commissioner of State Revenue v STIC Australia Pty Ltd

The Commissioner of State Revenue sought leave to appeal a decision made by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) regarding the application of the "just and reasonable" exemption under section 85 of the Duties Act 2000. STIC Australia Pty Ltd was the respondent in the original VCAT proceedings, and the dispute centred around whether the exemption applied to a transaction that occurred without a change in beneficial ownership. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the question of law proposed in the notice of appeal was sufficiently identified, as required by section 148 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998. The court also needed to determine the scope of the dispensing power under the "just and reasonable" exemption in section 85 of the Duties Act 2000, specifically whether it was permissible to consider the absence of a change in beneficial ownership on a relevant acquisition.

The court found that the proposed question of law did indeed identify a question of law of general public importance, and therefore granted leave to appeal. Regarding the scope of the exemption, the court concluded that there was no error of law in the VCAT's decision, aligning with the principles established in Challenger Listed Investment Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue [2010] VSC 464. The court emphasised that the absence of a change in beneficial ownership was not a factor that could be considered under the exemption.

The court ordered that leave to appeal be granted and the matter be remitted to VCAT for reconsideration in light of the court's determination.