Yevad Products Pty Ltd v Brookfield & Anor

Yevad Products Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute concerned the applicant's entitlement to a refund of goods and services tax (GST) paid on certain imported goods. The respondent, the Commissioner of Taxation, had disallowed the applicant's claim for a refund.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of s 105-60 of Schedule 1 to the *A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999* (Cth) (the GST Act). Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicant had paid the GST on the imported goods, and if so, whether it was entitled to a refund of that GST.

The High Court, in dismissing the application for leave to appeal, held that the applicant had not established that it had paid the GST in question. The court reasoned that the applicant had failed to demonstrate that it was the entity that had borne the economic burden of the GST. Without proof of payment of the GST by the applicant, the conditions for a refund under s 105-60 of the GST Act were not met. The court affirmed the Full Federal Court's finding that the applicant had not discharged its onus of proof in this regard.