| I N THE | FEDERAL | COURT | OF | AUSTRALIA | ) |
| 1 |
| S O U T H | A U S T R A L I A | D I S T R I C T | R E G I S T R Y | j | S. | A. | N o . | G 2 1 | of | 1 9 8 2 |
| 1 |
| GENERAL | D I V I S I O N | 1 |
ON A P P E A L f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a f l v e
A p p e a l s 'Tribunal General A d m i n i s t r a t i v e D i v i s i o n I n t h e m a t t e r o f A p p l i c a t i o n
f o r R e v l e w N o . S81/71 BETIFEEN :
S T E P H E N T I E N - P I N G S U
Applicant
AND : -
TAX AGENTS BOARD OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
R e s p o n d e n t
. . . O R D E R
| J U D G E S : | FOX J . , WOODWARD J . | and McGREGOR | J . | ' |
| DATE | OF | ORDER: | 1 2 N o v e m b e r | 1982 |
| WHERE | MADE : | A d e l a i d e |
| TIIE | COURT | ORDERS | THAT: |
T h e appeal be d i s m i s s e d w i t h costs .
In o u r v iew, the appea l must be dismissed.
| T h i s Court can only | dea l | on | t h i s | a p p e a l | with | ques t ions | o f |
| law. | On a p rope r | ana lys i s | o f | t he | appe l l an t ' s | a rgumen t s , |
| we | a r e | o f | t h e | view | t h a t | no such quest ion has | been ra | ised. |
| The | argument | of | counse l | f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t | amounted | t o no |
| more | than criticism | o f t h e way | the Tribunal | had marshal | led |
| the | evldence | and | the | welght | i t | had | given | t o v a r i o u s |
| c o n s i d e r a t i o n s | a r l s i n g | t h e r e f r o m . |
1Ve can add t ha t t he re was , i n o u r opinion, ample
| evidence | upon | whlch | the | Tribunal | could | reach | the | conclusion |
| it | d id . | The | appeal | should | be | dismissed | with | c o s t s and we |
| s o o r d e r . | 1Ve | make | no | o rde r 111 r e s p e c t of | t h e | c o s t s | o f | t h e |
| n o t i c e | o f | motion. |
. ..
I certify that thls and thc preccding page is a true copy
of the judgment of their
Honours Mr. Justice Fox, bfr.
Justice Woodward and hk. JustlceNcGregor .
&dtu QchiiGnlo
Assoclate
Date: f 2 d O V 1982.
Details
- AGLC
- Su, Stephen Tien-Ping v Tax Agents Board of South Australia [1982] FCA 287
- Case
- [1982] FCA 287
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicant, Stephen Tien-Ping Su, appealed against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), which had dismissed his application for review of a decision by the Tax Agents Board of South Australia. The nature of the dispute was that the AAT had determined that the applicant was not fit to be registered as a tax agent due to his lack of integrity, honesty, and trustworthiness. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, South Australia District Registry.
The legal issues that the court was required to decide were whether the AAT had erred in its decision and whether there were any questions of law that needed to be addressed. The applicant argued that the AAT had not properly considered the evidence and the weight it should have given to various considerations arising from it. However, the court found that the AAT had ample evidence to reach its conclusion and that the applicant's arguments amounted to no more than criticism of the way the evidence was marshalled and the weight given to it.
The court held that it could only deal with questions of law on this appeal and that no such question had been raised. The court was satisfied that the AAT had properly exercised its discretion and that the applicant's arguments did not present any legal issues. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed with costs, and the decision of the AAT was upheld.
In conclusion, the court dismissed the applicant's appeal against the decision of the AAT, which had found that he was not fit to be registered as a tax agent. The court held that the AAT had properly exercised its discretion and that there were no questions of law that needed to be addressed. The decision of the AAT was upheld, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.
The legal issues that the court was required to decide were whether the AAT had erred in its decision and whether there were any questions of law that needed to be addressed. The applicant argued that the AAT had not properly considered the evidence and the weight it should have given to various considerations arising from it. However, the court found that the AAT had ample evidence to reach its conclusion and that the applicant's arguments amounted to no more than criticism of the way the evidence was marshalled and the weight given to it.
The court held that it could only deal with questions of law on this appeal and that no such question had been raised. The court was satisfied that the AAT had properly exercised its discretion and that the applicant's arguments did not present any legal issues. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed with costs, and the decision of the AAT was upheld.
In conclusion, the court dismissed the applicant's appeal against the decision of the AAT, which had found that he was not fit to be registered as a tax agent. The court held that the AAT had properly exercised its discretion and that there were no questions of law that needed to be addressed. The decision of the AAT was upheld, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.