Caason Investments Pty Limited v Cao (No 5) [2021] FCA 321

Caason Investments Pty Limited v Cao (No 5) [2021] FCA 321

The deductions were appropriate because the Court had already refused Caason's application to strike out or stay Order 11(a), Caason had not appealed and could not re-litigate whether it retained the benefit of the $34,189; Caason did not oppose deduction of the $17,969.62 costs amount, and those costs arose from Caason's personal interlocutory application rather than the interests of group members.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding Concerning a Settlement Distribution Scheme / Determined on the Papers on the Scheme Administrator's Request for Deduction Orders
Outcome
Orders made authorising the Scheme Administrator to deduct the GST Issue amount and costs amount from any amounts payable to the First Applicant under the Settlement Distribution Scheme.
Legal Topics
['settlement Distribution Scheme' 'deduction From Amounts Payable Under Scheme' 'gst Refunds and Input Tax Credits' 'costs of Scheme Administrator' 'abuse of Process']
['practice and Procedure' 'representative Proceedings' 'commercial and Corporations' 'general and Personal Insolvency'] ['settlement Distribution Scheme' 'deduction From Amounts Payable Under Scheme' 'gst Refunds and Input Tax Credits' 'costs of Scheme Administrator' 'abuse of Process']

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

Representative Proceeding Concerning a Settlement Distribution Scheme / Determined on the Papers on the Scheme Administrator's Request for Deduction Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Scheme Administrator should be authorised to deduct $34,189 referable to the GST Issue from amounts payable to the First Applicant under the Settlement Distribution Scheme.' 'Whether the Scheme Administrator should be authorised to deduct $17,969.62 referable to her costs from amounts payable to the First Applicant under the Settlement Distribution Scheme.' 'Whether Caason could seek to re-litigate the issue of whether it retained the benefit of $34,189 paid to it by the ATO.']

Ratio Decidendi

The deductions were appropriate because the Court had already refused Caason's application to strike out or stay Order 11(a), Caason had not appealed and could not re-litigate whether it retained the benefit of the $34,189; Caason did not oppose deduction of the $17,969.62 costs amount, and those costs arose from Caason's personal interlocutory application rather than the interests of group members.

Court Disposition

Orders made authorising the Scheme Administrator to deduct the GST Issue amount and costs amount from any amounts payable to the First Applicant under the Settlement Distribution Scheme.

Orders

  • ['The Scheme Administrator is authorised to deduct the amount of $34,189 referable to the GST Issue, pursuant to Order 11(a) of the orders dated 6 December 2017, from any amounts payable to the First Applicant under the Settlement Distribution Scheme.' 'The Scheme Administrator is authorised to deduct the amount of...