Daniels v Cranston [2009] FCA 1412

No enforceable estoppel or legitimate expectation arose preventing the respondents from proceeding with s 264 examinations, as only procedural and not substantive protection is afforded, and procedural fairness was provided by the respondents specifically seeking the applicants' availability prior to rescheduling the dates. No relevant detriment to the applicants was established.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 20 November 2009
Procedural Posture: Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Dismissal of Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome: Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed
Legal Topics: ['legitimate Expectation' 'procedural Fairness' 'estoppel' 'section 264 Income Tax Assessment Act']

['administrative Law' 'taxation Law'] ['legitimate Expectation' 'procedural Fairness' 'estoppel' 'section 264 Income Tax Assessment Act']

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

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Dismissal of Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether respondents could be restrained from conducting examinations under s 264 of the Income Tax Assessment Act' "Whether an estoppel or legitimate expectation arose from the respondent's undertaking not to proceed with the examination until the litigation was disposed of" 'Whether procedural fairness required further deferral of the examinations']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed

Orders

['The application for an interlocutory injunction be dismissed.' "The applicants pay the respondents' costs of the interlocutory application."]