PEDEN & COMMISSIONER FOR ACT REVENUE (Administrative Review)
Case
•
[2013] ACAT 31
•27 March 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Peden and Commissioner for Act Revenue; (Administrative Review) [2013] ACAT 31
[2013] ACAT 31
27 March 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The application was brought by Ms Peden, who sought an extension of time to file an application for review of a decision made by the Commissioner for ACT Revenue on 6 July 2012. The application was heard by Ms Mary-Therese Daniel, a Member of the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The primary issue before the tribunal was whether Ms Peden had demonstrated exceptional circumstances to justify an extension of the time limit for filing her application for review.
The tribunal considered whether Ms Peden had acted with due diligence in seeking to file her application for review within the relevant time limit, and whether there were any exceptional circumstances that warranted an extension. Ms Peden argued that she had acted with due diligence, but the tribunal found that she had not demonstrated sufficient evidence to support this claim. The tribunal also found that there were no exceptional circumstances that warranted an extension of time.
As a result, the tribunal refused Ms Peden's application for an extension of time to file her application for review. The tribunal found that Ms Peden had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances to warrant an extension of time, and that she had not acted with due diligence in seeking to file her application for review within the relevant time limit. The application was dismissed, and no orders were made in favour of Ms Peden.
The tribunal considered whether Ms Peden had acted with due diligence in seeking to file her application for review within the relevant time limit, and whether there were any exceptional circumstances that warranted an extension. Ms Peden argued that she had acted with due diligence, but the tribunal found that she had not demonstrated sufficient evidence to support this claim. The tribunal also found that there were no exceptional circumstances that warranted an extension of time.
As a result, the tribunal refused Ms Peden's application for an extension of time to file her application for review. The tribunal found that Ms Peden had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances to warrant an extension of time, and that she had not acted with due diligence in seeking to file her application for review within the relevant time limit. The application was dismissed, and no orders were made in favour of Ms Peden.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Review
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Young v Conservator of Flora and Fauna (Administrative Review) [2024] ACAT 65
Cases Citing This Decision
2
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
GR8 Constructions Pty Ltd v O'Donnell
[2011] ACTSC 92
Parker v The Queen
[2002] FCAFC 133
Jokhan and Jokhan v Commissioner for ACT Revenue
[2012] ACAT 15