Wills v Petroulias

The parties involved were Wills (the applicant) and Petroulias (the respondent). The dispute concerned the respondent's alleged defrauding of the Commonwealth through the dishonest procurement of a private binding ruling. The matter came before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Criminal Appeal.

The central legal issues before the court were whether it was necessary to demonstrate that the private binding ruling obtained by the respondent was incorrect to establish the element of loss for the offence of defrauding the Commonwealth, and what orders were appropriate upon the identification of an error of law in the committal process, specifically concerning the availability of a *Basha* inquiry.

The Court considered the nature of the offence of defrauding the Commonwealth, particularly in the context of obtaining a private binding ruling. It was held that the offence does not necessarily require proof that the ruling itself was incorrect. Instead, the focus is on the dishonest procurement of the ruling, and the potential or actual loss to the Commonwealth revenue, which can include the loss of an opportunity to litigate or challenge the ruling. The Court also addressed the appropriate response to an error of law identified in the committal process, noting that a *Basha* inquiry might be relevant in certain circumstances to determine if the committal should be quashed.

Leave to appeal was granted, and the appeal was allowed with costs. The order quashing the committal was set aside.