Rusanov v Commissioner of Taxation [2025] FCAFC 11

Rusanov v Commissioner of Taxation [2025] FCAFC 11

Given the unopposed and substantiated medical evidence regarding the first appellant's condition, and the impact on both appellants, the appeal should be adjourned to the next sittings of the Full Court.

Parties
First Appellant: Maxim Rusanov; Second Appellant: Liudmila Rusanova; First Respondent: Commissioner of Taxation; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment Prior to Full Court Hearing
Outcome
Application for adjournment granted; hearing adjourned.
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Appeals on a Question of Law, Litigants in Person, Pro Bono Assistance
Taxation Law Adjournment Appeals on a Question of Law Litigants in Person Pro Bono Assistance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maxim Rusanov

First Appellant

Liudmila Rusanova

Second Appellant

Commissioner of Taxation

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment Prior to Full Court Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing of the appeal and notice of objection to competency should be adjourned

Ratio Decidendi

Given the unopposed and substantiated medical evidence regarding the first appellant's condition, and the impact on both appellants, the appeal should be adjourned to the next sittings of the Full Court.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment granted; hearing adjourned.

Orders

  • The appellants' application for adjournment is heard and determined on the papers.
  • Adjournment application granted.