PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – ex parte freezing orders obtained against respondents per rr 7.32 and 7.35 of Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where respondents paid money into Court to discharge freezing orders – application for repayment of money paid into Court – whether applicant had a good or reasonably arguable case based on a prospective cause of action –whether there was risk of asset dissipation that may defeat prospective judgment – whether balance of convenience favoured the making of the orders
TAXATION – freezing orders based on first and second respondents’ family trust distribution tax and income tax liabilities – challenge to applicant’s reliance on conclusive evidence provision in s 350-10 of sch 1 to Tax Administration Act 1953 (Cth) – argument of conscious maladministration and jurisdictional error as recognised in Commissioner of Taxation v Futuris Corporation Ltd (2008) 237 CLR 146 – whether there was material non-disclosure at the ex parte hearing
Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2023/2023fca0377
For more information, see the original judgement.
