Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v ShiCitation:[2021] HCA 22Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Gordon, Edelman, Gleeson JJDate:04 Aug 2021Case Number:S211/2020Read more

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v ShiCitation:[2021] HCA 22Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Gordon, Edelman, Gleeson JJDate:04 Aug 2021Case Number:S211/2020Read more

The court held that the information in the privilege affidavit could not be disclosed to the parties unless the interests of justice required such disclosure, and in this case, the interests of justice did not require disclosure.

Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Privilege Against Self Incrimination, Freezing Orders, Disclosure Orders
Evidence Law Civil Procedure Privilege Against Self Incrimination Freezing Orders Disclosure Orders

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether information in a privilege affidavit prepared under s 128A(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) can be disclosed to parties under s 128A(6)
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require disclosure of information in the privilege affidavit

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the information in the privilege affidavit could not be disclosed to the parties unless the interests of justice required such disclosure, and in this case, the interests of justice did not require disclosure.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Information in the privilege affidavit is not to be disclosed to the parties
  • Costs to be paid by the appellant