Deputy Commissioner of Taxation Plaintiff/ v Dooney Superannuation Pty Ltd

[2000] QCA 360

COURT OF APPEAL

PINCUS JA
THOMAS JA
JONES J

Appeal No 9347 of 1999

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION Plaintiff/Respondent

and

DOONEY SUPERANNUATION PTY LTD
(ACN 073 346 282) AS TRUSTEE FOR
THE DOONEY SUPER FUND Defendant/Appellant

BRISBANE

..DATE 04/09/2000

JUDGMENT

PINCUS JA: This is an appeal in which an outline has been filed of a remarkable character, suggesting that the appeal has no substance and is frivolous.

Counsel for the respondent ask for dismissal of the appeal, on the ground that there has been no appearance on the appellant's side and that the appeal has no substance. The name of the appellant has been called three times outside the Court and there has been no appearance, and the matter has been called on well after the time listed.

When one has regard to those circumstances, together with the character of the outline, it appears to me that the proper orders are those which are sought by the respondent's counsel, that is, I would order that the appeal be dismissed and that the appellant pay the respondent's costs on an indemnity basis.

There has also been some discussion of whether an order should be made against legal practitioners involved.
Mr Logan SC has helpfully given us some information on that subject which might suggest that it is not an appropriate course. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the question may require further investigation, and I would reserve the question of costs against persons other than the appellant for further consideration.

Subject to that, I would dismiss the appeal with costs on an indemnity basis.

THOMAS JA: I agree.

JONES J: And I agree also.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Dooney Superannuation Pty Ltd is an appeal brought before the Court of Appeal. The plaintiff, the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation, sought to enforce tax liabilities against the defendant, Dooney Superannuation Pty Ltd, as trustee for the Dooney Super Fund. The defendant failed to appear in court despite multiple calls, leading to the plaintiff's counsel seeking dismissal of the appeal on the grounds of frivolity and lack of substance.

The legal issues at hand were whether the appeal had any merit and, if not, what the appropriate sanction should be for the defendant's failure to appear. The court was also required to determine if any additional costs should be imposed on the legal practitioners involved. Given the circumstances of the case, the court needed to balance the principles of justice with the need to maintain the integrity of the legal process.

The Court of Appeal found that the appeal was frivolous and lacked substance, as evidenced by the defendant's repeated failure to appear. The judges concluded that the proper course of action was to dismiss the appeal and order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs on an indemnity basis. The court also noted that while the matter of imposing costs on legal practitioners might require further investigation, they would reserve this decision for later consideration. The appeal was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the plaintiff on an indemnity basis.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established