Collector of Customs v Johnson & Johnson Medical Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 783

Collector of Customs v Johnson & Johnson Medical Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 783

The appeal failed because the AAT's finding that Fabric 450 was paper was reasonably open on the evidence and was not perverse or unsupported by probative material. On that footing, note 1(m) to Section XI excluded classification under Chapter 63, and sub-heading 4823.90.10 was capable of applying to articles constituted substantially of aseptic paper. The AAT committed no error of law in classifying the goods to item 4823.90.10.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 September 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal Pursuant to S.44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) From an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Concerning Customs Tariff Classification / Federal Court Appeal From the General Administrative Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['customs Tariff Classification' 'surgical Drapes and Surgical Packs' 'paper and Nonwovens' 'aat Findings of Fact' 'general Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System' 'customs Tariff Act 1987 (cth), Schedule 3']
['customs and Excise' 'administrative Law'] ['customs Tariff Classification' 'surgical Drapes and Surgical Packs' 'paper and Nonwovens' 'aat Findings of Fact' 'general Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System' 'customs Tariff Act 1987 (cth), Schedule 3']

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

Appeal Pursuant to S.44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) From an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Concerning Customs Tariff Classification / Federal Court Appeal From the General Administrative Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was reasonably open to the AAT to find that Fabric 450 was paper rather than a nonwoven for the purposes of Chapter 48 of Schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act 1987 (Cth).' 'Whether note 1(m) to Section XI excluded classification of the goods under Chapter 63 once the goods were classifiable under Chapter 48.' 'Whether sub-heading 4823.90.10 for aseptic paper could apply to surgical drapes and surgical packs substantially made from aseptic paper, rather than only to aseptic paper in a pure state.' 'Whether the goods should alternatively have been classified under item 4818.90.00 rather than item 4823.90.10.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the AAT's finding that Fabric 450 was paper was reasonably open on the evidence and was not perverse or unsupported by probative material. On that footing, note 1(m) to Section XI excluded classification under Chapter 63, and sub-heading 4823.90.10 was capable of applying to articles constituted substantially of aseptic paper. The AAT committed no error of law in classifying the goods to item 4823.90.10.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed, with costs.']