Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Freudenstein [2007] NSWCA 297

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Freudenstein [2007] NSWCA 297

The Court held that there was evidence supporting the finding that the director had reasonable grounds to expect, and did expect, the company would comply with the tax repayment agreement; the claim that such grounds had to be proved by mathematical certainty was rejected, and no error in the trial judge's fact-finding was demonstrated. Given the lack of any question of principle and the amount involved, leave to appeal was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From District Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Summons for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
["director's Liability" 'statutory Defence' 'agreements to Pay Tax by Instalments' 'reasonable Grounds for Expectation']
['taxation Law'] ["director's Liability" 'statutory Defence' 'agreements to Pay Tax by Instalments' 'reasonable Grounds for Expectation']

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

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From District Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the director had reasonable grounds to expect and did expect that the company would comply with a tax instalment agreement under s 222AQD(5) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (C'th)" "Whether there was sufficient evidence before the trial judge to support the director's statutory defence" 'Whether failure of projects after the agreement negates the existence of reasonable grounds at the time the agreement was made']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that there was evidence supporting the finding that the director had reasonable grounds to expect, and did expect, the company would comply with the tax repayment agreement; the claim that such grounds had to be proved by mathematical certainty was rejected, and no error in the trial judge's fact-finding was demonstrated. Given the lack of any question of principle and the amount involved, leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Summons for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The summons for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.']