Gerard Cassegrain & Co Pty Limited v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCAFC 12

Gerard Cassegrain & Co Pty Limited v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCAFC 12

The Tribunal followed the directions given on remitter, identified and valued the relevant releases, surrenders and contractual undertakings, and made a reasonable attribution under s 160ZD(4). The taxpayers' and Commissioner's complaints were largely directed to factual valuation and attribution in an exercise incapable of exactitude, and did not establish error of law or inadequate reasons. Accordingly, both the appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal From the Administrative Appeals Tribunal / Appeal and Cross Appeal on a Question of Law Under S 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth)
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['capital Gains Tax' 'lump Sum Payment Pursuant to Deed' 'interpretation of Deed' 'apportionment of Consideration Between Payees' 'appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal on Question of Law']
['taxation' 'administrative Law'] ['capital Gains Tax' 'lump Sum Payment Pursuant to Deed' 'interpretation of Deed' 'apportionment of Consideration Between Payees' 'appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal on Question of Law']

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal From the Administrative Appeals Tribunal / Appeal and Cross Appeal on a Question of Law Under S 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal made an error of law in construing cl 2.2(a) of the Deed of Settlement and Release.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in attributing and valuing releases, surrenders and contractual undertakings for the purposes of s 160ZD(4) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth).' "Whether the Tribunal gave inadequate reasons or otherwise erred in valuing Claude Cassegrain's defamation claim and restraint undertaking." 'Whether the appeal and cross-appeal raised questions of law rather than challenges to factual valuation and attribution.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal followed the directions given on remitter, identified and valued the relevant releases, surrenders and contractual undertakings, and made a reasonable attribution under s 160ZD(4). The taxpayers' and Commissioner's complaints were largely directed to factual valuation and attribution in an exercise incapable of exactitude, and did not establish error of law or inadequate reasons. Accordingly, both the appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal and cross appeal dismissed.' 'No order as to costs.']