Gill, P.S. v Watson, A.J. & Ors [1995] FCA 373

Gill, P.S. v Watson, A.J. & Ors [1995] FCA 373

The determination of customs value made on 13 January 1995 appears to form part of the process of making or leading up to the making of a calculation of duty and thus falls within the class of decisions excluded from review under para 1(e) of Sch 1 of the ADJR Act; however, as it is not clear that the determination was made for the purpose of levying additional duty (and there may be no other avenue of challenge), the final ruling on competency is postponed.

Parties
Applicant: Parambir Singh Gill; First Respondent: Anthony John Watson; Second Respondent: Lionel Woodward, The Comptroller-General of Customs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 June 1995
Procedural Posture
Motion to Strike Out Application / Interlocutory (preliminary Motion on Objection to Competency)
Outcome
Objection to competency stood over. Leave to amend application granted. Costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Review of Customs Value Determination, ADJR Act Jurisdiction, Forfeiture of Goods, Calculation of Customs Duties
Administrative Law Customs Law Review of Customs Value Determination ADJR Act Jurisdiction Forfeiture of Goods Calculation of Customs Duties

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Parambir Singh Gill

Applicant

Anthony John Watson

First Respondent

Lionel Woodward, The Comptroller-General of Customs

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Motion to Strike Out Application / Interlocutory (preliminary Motion on Objection to Competency)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a decision reviewing a determination of customs value is reviewable under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) given para 1(e) of Sch 1
  2. 2 Whether the new customs value determination is within the class of exempted decisions under the ADJR Act
  3. 3 Whether the determination was for a purpose extraneous to the calculation of duty

Ratio Decidendi

The determination of customs value made on 13 January 1995 appears to form part of the process of making or leading up to the making of a calculation of duty and thus falls within the class of decisions excluded from review under para 1(e) of Sch 1 of the ADJR Act; however, as it is not clear that the determination was made for the purpose of levying additional duty (and there may be no other avenue of challenge), the final ruling on competency is postponed.

Court Disposition

Objection to competency stood over. Leave to amend application granted. Costs reserved.

Orders

  • Leave be granted to the applicant to amend his application within 14 days of the date of judgment.
  • The notice of objection to competency be adjourned to a date to be fixed.