Patterson v Farrell [1912] HCA 43

Patterson v Farrell [1912] HCA 43

The purchaser is liable under the apportionment clause to pay a proportionate share of federal land tax calculated by reference to the unimproved value of the land sold and the period of possession, but is not liable at a higher rate due to the vendor owning other land. Such an apportionment is not prohibited by s.63 of the Act.

Parties
Appellant; Plaintiff: Daniel Whittle Harvey Patterson; Respondent; Defendant: John Farrell
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 1912
Procedural Posture
Appeal (on a Special Case, Civil) / High Court Appeal From Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment below discharged; judgment for plaintiff
Legal Topics
Vendor and Purchaser, Apportionment of Land Tax, Interpretation of Contract Conditions, Land Tax Assessment Act 1910, S.63
Contract Law Tax Law Vendor and Purchaser Apportionment of Land Tax Interpretation of Contract Conditions Land Tax Assessment Act 1910, S.63

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Whittle Harvey Patterson

Appellant; Plaintiff

John Farrell

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (on a Special Case, Civil) / High Court Appeal From Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether federal land tax is an 'annual outgoing' under the contract
  2. 2 Whether apportionment of federal land tax between vendor and purchaser is valid under Land Tax Assessment Act 1910 s.63
  3. 3 Whether purchaser is liable for land tax at a higher rate due to vendor's ownership of other land

Ratio Decidendi

The purchaser is liable under the apportionment clause to pay a proportionate share of federal land tax calculated by reference to the unimproved value of the land sold and the period of possession, but is not liable at a higher rate due to the vendor owning other land. Such an apportionment is not prohibited by s.63 of the Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment below discharged; judgment for plaintiff

Orders

  • Respondent to pay proportion of land tax attributable to period of possession from 8 December 1910 to 30 June 1911 based on the unimproved value of £29,870
  • Respondent to pay costs of action