Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Vasiliades [2015] FCA 957

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Vasiliades [2015] FCA 957

The applicant failed to provide an adequate explanation for the failure to participate in previous hearings or to give evidence of irreparable prejudice; the reasons provided were insufficient to deprive the respondent of the benefit of judgment and orders; and the balance of prejudice and convenience did not favour granting interim relief.

Parties
Applicant: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation; First Respondent: Socrates Vasiliades; Second Respondent: Celeste Vasiliades; Fourth Respondent: Falconbridge Pty Ltd (ACN 074 383 805)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Judgment and Orders; Application for Interim Stay/variation / Directions Hearing for Interim Relief; Principal Application Set Down for Trial
Outcome
Application for interim orders dismissed; principal application to set aside judgment and orders listed for trial.
Legal Topics
Set Aside Judgment, Stay of Orders, Extension of Time, Failure to Appear, Interim Relief
Practice and Procedure Set Aside Judgment Stay of Orders Extension of Time Failure to Appear Interim Relief

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation

Applicant

Socrates Vasiliades

First Respondent

Celeste Vasiliades

Second Respondent

Falconbridge Pty Ltd (ACN 074 383 805)

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Judgment and Orders; Application for Interim Stay/variation / Directions Hearing for Interim Relief; Principal Application Set Down for Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant interim relief staying or varying orders of 7 August 2015
  2. 2 Whether there is an adequate explanation for failure to appear at earlier hearings
  3. 3 Whether interim stay would cause prejudice to the parties

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide an adequate explanation for the failure to participate in previous hearings or to give evidence of irreparable prejudice; the reasons provided were insufficient to deprive the respondent of the benefit of judgment and orders; and the balance of prejudice and convenience did not favour granting interim relief.

Court Disposition

Application for interim orders dismissed; principal application to set aside judgment and orders listed for trial.

Orders

  • Application for interim relief to stay or vary 7 August 2015 orders dismissed.
  • Principal application set down for trial on 1 December 2015.