Puzey v Commissioner of Taxation

[2004] FCAFC 51

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Puzey v Commissioner of Taxation [2004] FCAFC 51

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) s 8-1

NOEL PUZEY V COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
W 30 of 2003
W 31 of 2003

FRENCH, HILL & CARR JJ
5 MARCH 2004

PERTH

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W30 OF 2003

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	NOEL PUZEY  APPELLANT
AND:	COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT
JUDGES:	FRENCH, HILL & CARR JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	5 MARCH 2004
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W30 OF 2003

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	NOEL PUZEY APPELLANT
AND:	COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	FRENCH, HILL AND CARR JJ
DATE:	5 MARCH 2004
PLACE:	PERTH

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
ON COSTS

THE COURT:

1. When judgment was given in this matter on 26 August 2003 the operation of paragraph 1 of the orders made on 26 August 2003 was suspended for ten days and the parties invited to make submissions concerning plantation management fees and plantation establishment fees.  Submissions were received and judgment on those supplementary submissions was delivered on 13 February 2004 confirming the orders made on 26 August 2003. 

2. When judgment was delivered counsel for the respondent sought the costs of the appeal in W30 of 2003.  Counsel for the appellant was unable to put any oral submission against such an order at that time.  However, having regard to the fact that the judgment of the Court was delivered by French J and the necessity to refer the outstanding costs question to all members of the Full Court, counsel for the appellant was allowed seven days within which to make any written submission that costs should not follow the event in appeal W30.  No such submission has been received.  Costs should follow the event.  The Court orders accordingly.

   I certify that the preceding two
   (2) numbered paragraphs  are a
   true copy of the Reasons for
   Judgment of the Court.

   Associate:
   Date:               5 March 2004

Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr J W De Wijn QC and Mr SHP Steward
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Wilson & Atkinson
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr G Davies QC, Ms H Symon SC and Ms L Price
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Further Supplementary Reasons for Judgment as to Costs:	5 March 2004