Showing 1–35 of 135 results
On 11 March 2020, the High Court unanimously dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal from the Full Federal Court regarding attribution of income under Part X of the ITAA 1936.
Key to the decision was the High Court’s reasoning that each of BHP Billiton Ltd and BHP Billiton Plc exercised ‘sufficient influence’ over the other within the meaning of s 318(6) of the ITAA 1936.
An expert panel – including two counsel who appeared in the matter before the High Court – discuss the decision and key implications for taxpayers.
The recent introduction of Evidence Amendment (Tendency and Coincidence) Bill 2020 (NSW) by the NSW Government, likely to be soon followed in Victoria, expressly and aggressively lowers further the threshold for admissibility of tendency evidence insofar as it relates to child sex offences.
Following on the heels of the High Court’s recent tendency rulings, the proposed legislation turns up the heat on the debate about whether that threshold has been lowered too far or doesn’t go far enough, whether this discrete aspect of evidence law should be fragmented, and amplifies the disconnect between modern tendency law and the underlying principles developed through more than a century of common law.
In their second Zoom webinar on virtual hearings, Emrys Nekvapil and Kathleen Foley facilitate an interactive session on Microsoft Teams, the software used for virtual hearings in the Federal Court. The Honourables Justice O’Callaghan and Justice Thawley also participate in the webinar, providing insight from the perspective of the judge presiding over a virtual hearing. The webinar also include a mock mini-hearing using Microsoft Teams.
Hosted by The Tax Bar Association, this online webinar about the recent Full Federal Court decision in Commissioner of Taxation v The Trustee for the Michael Hayes Family Trust  FCAFC 226. The case deals with the doctrines of mistake and rectification in tax disputes as well as specific issues related to public trading trusts and superannuation.
Gareth Redenbach provides an overview of the case and its general implications for tax disputes. The session is chaired by Michael Flynn QC who appeared for the successful trustee.
Emrys Nekvapil and Kathleen Foley present a practical seminar on virtual appearance work. They will introduce you to the equipment and videoconferencing software you need to appear in a virtual environment, help with technical issues that might occur, and explain the challenges of effective advocacy in a virtual setting.
This seminar is presented by two experienced migration law practitioners who will discuss the interaction between the criminal law and the cancellation of a visa and deportation.
This seminar will help lawyers who are prepared to help clients with migration law problems, but who may be new to migration law or administrative law in general, to understand the basics of running migration litigation.
Private entities sometimes exercise public power or perform governmental functions and often deliver services on behalf of governments. In these situations, complex public law issues concerning control and accountability arise. This seminar examines some of those issues.
Since 1989 DNA evidence has been relied upon in Australian courts to secure convictions. In subsequent years there has been significant developments in the technology used to obtain DNA, from 9 to 21 loci and STRMix, and the application of DNA including the establishment of a national DNA database. Every step along the way has been the subject of legal challenge with a considerable body of case law being the result.
The future for practitioners is likely to see just as much development with an increasing reliance in prosecutions upon familial searching, the profiling of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y-chromosome DNA and forensic DNA phenotyping (FDP). This seminar will discuss these changes and explore future directions.
On 4 September 2019, Dr Matt Collins AM QC gave a speech to the National Press Club in Canberra about the law of defamation in Australia. In that speech, he advocated that the defamation laws were out-of-date and flawed. He advocated that there should be a new cause of action: declaration of falsity and that the burden to prove falsity ought to reside with the plaintiff.
The speakers at this seminar will debate the contents of his speech and discuss where the laws of defamation are headed.
In this seminar there will be a discussion of techniques and strategies on how to champion and see the passage of legislation while serving in the minority party of a legislature, with specific reference to:
Tax issues such as CGT (including rollover relief), Division 7A as well as trust and corporate law issues frequently arise in family law property proceedings. A recent trend has also seen the Commissioner of Taxation intervening in s79 proceedings to secure payment of tax debts owed by a party or parties to the marriage prior to any distribution of property.
As solicitors and barristers, it is our duty to assist the members of the judiciary to carry out their judicial function. In carrying out that duty, we are subject to very important obligations imposed by the Civil Procedure Act 2010 and the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. As the consumers of our advocacy services, who better to hear from on such an important topic than the judges.
This session will be focussed on practical measures that can be taken to avoid annoying the court and to ensure that proceedings run as smoothly and efficiently as possible.
The seminar will include a discussion on the High Court’s decision in the context of recent developments and the implications this has on taxpayers’ rights in dealings with the ATO.
The High Court decision has clarified how liquidators of corporate trustees may deal with trust assets and the application of the priority regime prescribed by the Corporations Act 2001 to the distribution of the proceeds of trust assets to trust creditors. The decision also resolves the long-standing tension between the decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia in Re Suco Gold Pty Ltd (in liq) (1983) SASR 99 and the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria in Re Enhill Pty Ltd  1 VR 561.
This session builds on the previous Victorian Bar CPD session that provided an introduction and overview to blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. This session will survey the extant Australian case law considering blockchain and cryptocurrencies, drawing out the key themes and implications for the law and legal practice. The session will also delve into current regulatory trends and make predictions about the types of evidentiary, legal, and jurisdictional issues that may arise in the context of future legal disputes.
Discussion: Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner Fiona McLeay & Dr Matthew Collins AM QC, President of the Bar
Confidentiality in mediation and the extent to which what is said or done can be used outside the mediation, is an area which continues to raise questions. The seminar will bring practitioners up to date with various aspects of confidentiality in mediations.
In the seminar, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Chief Judge of the County Court of Victoria, the Chief Magistrate of the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and the President of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal will each explore emerging practice areas, as well as highlighting those practice areas that are static or shrinking.
The seminar will discuss the following topics:
Commissioner of State Revenue v Placer Dome Inc  HCA 59 (5 December 2018) provides valuable insight into valuations in a mining context and a detailed discussion of legal and valuation issues related to goodwill. The decision is likely to be influential in many different tax contexts, including stamp duty, capital gains tax and tax consolidations. Eugene Wheelahan S.C. will explain the decision and explain some of its potential implications for tax law.
In August, the High Court delivered three significant judgments dealing with judicial review. The judgments concern the relationship between appellate review and legal unreasonableness (Minister v SZVFW; and, in the last week, TTY167) and the extent to which an error must be material in order to be “jurisdictional” (Hossain and Shrestha). They are likely to have significant implications for Australian public law, both in theory and in practice.