25 Oct 2023
Extension of time under r29A was declined because, although the delay was short and caused no apparent prejudice, the proposed appeal was clearly hopeless as s109 Tax Administration Act 1994 prevents the challenge to the tax assessment in District Court proceedings and the default judgment could not be successfully set aside.
9 Mar 2023
Leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed because the High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to the tax assessment under s 109 of the Tax Administration Act 1994, rendering the proposed appeal hopeless; the applicant provided an inadequate explanation for the delay and no sufficient prejudice to respondent was shown to justify granting leave.
9 May 2019
The application to set aside the bankruptcy notice is dismissed because the underlying District Court judgment remains valid on the record (earlier application to set aside was dismissed), service was established by sworn affidavits, the Tax Administration Act s109 restricts substantive challenge outside statutory review, the proposed counterclaim is barred by privilege and by r5.61 and appears manufactured, and therefore the bankruptcy notice should not be set aside.
24 Aug 2016
s76 IA did not apply because the TRA proceedings were not proceedings to recover a provable debt; assessments are valid under s109 TAA; on the merits the TRA correctly found the relevant series of transactions constituted an arrangement under s61 GST Act whose effect stripped the companies of assets leaving them unable to meet GST liabilities, an objective purpose of the arrangement was to defeat payment of tax, and the director could have anticipated the $1.7M GST liability, so the appellant was properly assessed and the appeal is dismissed.
15 Feb 2016
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal solely on the question whether s109 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 precluded criminal conviction on counts 101–110; it dismissed leave on all other grounds, holding there was no appearance of miscarriage of justice from the trial judge's reliance on voluntary disclosures or from the convictions on other grounds and that the sentence did not presently warrant leave, while reserving the possibility of resentencing if the s109 appeal succeeds.
15 Dec 2015
There was no evidence the Commissioner accepted the bills of exchange in the statutory form required by the Bills of Exchange Act 1908 (signed on the bill by the drawee and stating payment of money), so the bills did not extinguish or reduce the tax debts; accordingly the Commissioner was entitled to adjudication in bankruptcy under the Insolvency Act 2006.
6 Jun 2014
Section 109 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 precluded the defendant from disputing the GST assessment in this Court absent proper objection or challenge, so the defendant had no arguable defence to the liquidation claim; consequently the extension of time was refused, the statement of defence struck out and a liquidation order was made.
2 May 2013
The judge correctly exercised discretion under s57 to refuse non‑lawyer representation absent special circumstances; the NOPA did not create a disputable decision that could be litigated in District Court recovery proceedings; s109 bars enquiry into assessments in this forum; therefore the Commissioner was entitled to judgment for the unpaid assessed tax and the appeal must be dismissed.
1 Jun 2012
The Court found the appellants' proceedings were an abuse of process and frivolous and vexatious, authorising departure from scale costs; exercising discretion and taking into account the appellants' self-representation, the Court awarded costs to the respondent of $7,500 plus disbursements rather than full indemnity costs.
28 Feb 2011
The Commissioner established the debt by affidavit, calculations and a certificate of unpaid debt; s109 of the Tax Administration Act prevents the defendant's pleaded disputes from defeating that proof; a statutory demand was served and not satisfied creating a presumption of inability to pay; accordingly the court must appoint liquidators and awarded costs to the plaintiff.