Skyring v Commissioner of Taxation

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for leave to appeal by Mr A.G. Skyring, appearing in person, against the Commissioner of Taxation, represented by Mr C.M. Erskine. The dispute concerned an order for costs made by the Chief Justice, which stemmed from Mr Skyring's attempt to remove a matter to the High Court for determination. Mr Skyring contended that the fundamental issue requiring resolution was the definition of legal tender in Australia.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the fundamental question of what constitutes legal tender in Australia had been satisfactorily resolved, and whether Mr Skyring had been given adequate opportunity to present his arguments on this matter in previous proceedings. Mr Skyring argued that previous rulings had not addressed the core of his contention, and that the practical difficulties he encountered, such as the cost of providing nomination fees in gold coin, indicated a fundamental flaw in the understanding or application of the law regarding legal tender.

The Court, comprising Brennan, Gaudron, and McHugh JJ, indicated that it had heard Mr Skyring's arguments on this point on several previous occasions. Brennan J noted that Mr Skyring had been given liberty to develop his arguments but had not succeeded in his applications. The Court expressed concern about the time and resources required to repeatedly hear the same arguments. Mr Skyring maintained that the issue remained unresolved and sought to demonstrate this through his experiences with the Currency Act and nomination fees.