Re Carmody; Ex parte Glennan [2000] HCA 37

Re Carmody; Ex parte Glennan [2000] HCA 37

Relief was refused because none of the applicant's grounds demonstrated a reasonably arguable case for the issuance of constitutional writs or ancillary relief; jurisdictional arguments regarding the Full Court, applicability and binding nature of Public Tax Ruling, validity of Foster J's orders, and interpretation of appeal provisions failed by reference to statutory schemes and established court rules.

Parties
Applicant: Michael John Glennan; First Respondent: Michael Carmody in his capacity as Commissioner of Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia; Second Respondent: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia; Third Respondent: Judges of the Federal Court of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Constitutional Writs and Ancillary Relief / Single Justice, Application for Order Nisi
Outcome
Application for order nisi refused
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Federal Court, Appeals From Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Public Tax Ruling, Constitutional Writs, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Income Tax Jurisdiction of Federal Court Appeals From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Public Tax Ruling Constitutional Writs Mandamus +2 more

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 6 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael John Glennan

Applicant

Michael Carmody in his capacity as Commissioner of Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia

First Respondent

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia

Second Respondent

Judges of the Federal Court of Australia

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Constitutional Writs and Ancillary Relief / Single Justice, Application for Order Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Full Court of Federal Court had jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from Foster J
  2. 2 Whether Commissioner was bound to comply with Public Tax Ruling when contradictory order of Federal Court exists
  3. 3 Whether Foster J acted beyond jurisdiction by remitting determination to Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

Relief was refused because none of the applicant's grounds demonstrated a reasonably arguable case for the issuance of constitutional writs or ancillary relief; jurisdictional arguments regarding the Full Court, applicability and binding nature of Public Tax Ruling, validity of Foster J's orders, and interpretation of appeal provisions failed by reference to statutory schemes and established court rules.

Court Disposition

Application for order nisi refused

Orders

  • Application for order nisi refused
  • Applicant to pay respondents' costs