Thiel v Commissioner of Taxation

Case [1991] HCATrans 78


Altt ~,~~ST!lA.LIA,,.t-- ---m))$~"-...,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Perth No Pll of 1989

B e t w e e n -

GUNTER THIEL

Appellant

and

COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION

Respondent

Publication of Order for

Costs

MASON CJ DAWSON J TOOHEY J

Thiel 1 15/3/91

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FROM ADELAIDE BY VIDEO LINK TO CANBERRA

ON FRIDAY, 15 MARCH 1991, AT 9.33 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MASON CJ:  When the Court delivered judgment in this matter

on 26 August 1990 it reserved liberty to the

appellant to apply with respect to the cost of the

proceedings in the Supreme Court of Western

Australia and the Full Court of the Federal Court. The appellant has applied for an order for his costs of those proceedings and the Court has had the advantage of considering written submissions

filed by the appellant and the respondent.

The Court has come to the conclusion that the

respondent should pay the appellant's costs of the

proceedings in the supreme court and the Federal

court.

In the result the Court makes the following

order: order that the appellant's costs of the

proceedings in the Supreme Court of Western

Australia and the Full Court of the Federal Court

be paid by the respondent.

AT 9.34 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Thiel 2 15/3/91
Details
AGLC
Thiel v Commissioner of Taxation [1991] HCATrans 78
Case
[1991] HCATrans 78
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Thiel v Commissioner of Taxation*, the High Court of Australia considered an application by the appellant for an order regarding the costs of proceedings in the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the Full Court of the Federal Court. The Court had previously delivered judgment in the matter on 26 August 1990, at which time it reserved liberty for the appellant to apply concerning these costs.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the respondent, the Commissioner of Taxation, should be ordered to pay the appellant's costs incurred in the lower courts. The Court had the benefit of written submissions from both the appellant and the respondent in determining this question.

The High Court concluded that the respondent should indeed bear the costs of the appellant for the proceedings in both the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the Full Court of the Federal Court. Accordingly, the Court ordered that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of those proceedings.

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.