Andrijic v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (No 2) [2025] NSWSC 119

Andrijic v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (No 2) [2025] NSWSC 119

The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify the grant of a stay on recovery proceedings under s 46 notices, as it did not establish that continued enforcement would stultify its business, nor demonstrate prospects of success on the objection or exceptional circumstances warranting interlocutory relief. The statutory framework entitles the defendant to recover pending objection or review.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Karina Andrijic; Second Plaintiff: Igor Cikes; Third Plaintiff: Rade Cikes; Fourth Plaintiff: Rosa Cikes; Fifth Plaintiff: Incline Group Pty Ltd; Sixth Plaintiff: Cikes Developments NSW Pty Ltd; Seventh Plaintiff: Cikes Holdings Pty Ltd; Eighth Plaintiff: Dalma Hire Pty Ltd; Ninth Plaintiff: Icikes Holdings Pty Ltd; Tenth Plaintiff: Dalma Constructions Pty Ltd; Eleventh Plaintiff: Dalma Services NSW Pty Ltd; Twelfth Plaintiff: Yaleson Corporation Pty Ltd; Thirteenth Plaintiff: Jason Andrijic; Fourteenth Plaintiff: Incline Hire Pty Ltd; Defendant: Chief Commissioner of State Revenue
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application – Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Recovery of Tax Debts, Stay of Proceedings, Payroll Tax Liability, Grouping for Payroll Tax, Interlocutory Injunctions, Objection and Review Under Tax Statutes

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karina Andrijic

First Plaintiff

Igor Cikes

Second Plaintiff

Rade Cikes

Third Plaintiff

Rosa Cikes

Fourth Plaintiff

Incline Group Pty Ltd

Fifth Plaintiff

Cikes Developments NSW Pty Ltd

Sixth Plaintiff

Cikes Holdings Pty Ltd

Seventh Plaintiff

Dalma Hire Pty Ltd

Eighth Plaintiff

Icikes Holdings Pty Ltd

Ninth Plaintiff

Dalma Constructions Pty Ltd

Tenth Plaintiff

Dalma Services NSW Pty Ltd

Eleventh Plaintiff

Yaleson Corporation Pty Ltd

Twelfth Plaintiff

Jason Andrijic

Thirteenth Plaintiff

Incline Hire Pty Ltd

Fourteenth Plaintiff

Chief Commissioner of State Revenue

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application – Ex Tempore Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be prevented from taking recovery action pending objection/review process
  2. 2 Whether certain notices under s 46 of the Taxation Administration Act 1996 (NSW) should be stayed
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's trading ability will be stultified if notices are not stayed

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify the grant of a stay on recovery proceedings under s 46 notices, as it did not establish that continued enforcement would stultify its business, nor demonstrate prospects of success on the objection or exceptional circumstances warranting interlocutory relief. The statutory framework entitles the defendant to recover pending objection or review.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Notice of motion dismissed with costs