Chew & Anor v The Commissioner of Land Tax [2007] HCATrans 635 (8 November 2007)

Last Updated: 16 November 2007

[2007] HCATrans 635

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Brisbane No B19 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

LAI LENG CHEW

First Applicant

MANJIT SINGH

Second Applicant

and

THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND TAX

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

HAYNE J
CRENNAN J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 8 NOVEMBER 2007, AT 9.02 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HAYNE J: The applicants were the joint owners of several parcels of land in Queensland. In 2004 the respondent issued assessments, and in 2005 amended assessments, of the applicants' liability under the Land Tax Act 1915 (Q) to land tax on land the applicants owned at midnight on 30 June 2004. Valuations used to assess the land tax had not been served on the applicants. The applicants objected to the assessments and that objection was later treated as an objection to the amended assessments. The applicants' objections were disallowed and the applicants appealed to the Land Court of Queensland.

The applicants did not appear at the hearing of the appeal and the appeal was dismissed. The applicants then appealed to the Land Appeal Court of Queensland and, when that appeal was dismissed, to the Court of Appeal of Queensland. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and the applicants seek special leave to appeal to this Court.

In the Court of Appeal the applicants sought to make three points: first that they had been denied natural justice when their initial appeal to the Land Court was dismissed; second that, not having had notice of the valuations used to assess the land tax due, the assessments and amended assessments that had been issued were invalid; and third that because they had made a contract to sell one of the relevant pieces of land before 30 June 2004 they were not liable to tax on that land even though they had not completed the contract and given possession to the buyer. Though elaborated to an extent, the applicants seek to make the same points on appeal to this Court.

We see no reason to doubt the correctness of the conclusions of the Court of Appeal.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. I publish that disposition.

AT 9.04 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED