Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Denlay v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCA 1092 Citation: Denlay v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCA 1092
Parties: KEVIN VINCENT DENLAY v COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION MIRJA HELENA DENLAY v COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION
File number(s): QUD 151 of 2009 QUD 152 of 2009
Judge: LOGAN J
Date of judgment: 9 June 2011
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – voir dire – illegal or improperly obtained evidence – where witness sought to be cross-examined on material that was derived from information obtained by an allegedly unlawful act – whether this derived evidence was admissible – where respondent not involved in impropriety – where taxation officers able refer to broad information base when making assessments or where assessments deemed lawful in Full Court proceeding – application of Pearce v Button discretion to admit evidence – cross-examination allowed to continue
Legislation: Customs Act 1901 (Cth) s 214 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 26, 43, 138 Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) ss 166, 263, 264
Cases cited: Cooke v Maxwell (1816) 171 ER 614; 2 Stark 183 considered Denlay v Commissioner of Taxation [2011] FCAFC 63 considered Denlay v Commissioner of Taxation (2010) 276 ALR 675 considered Pearce v Button (1985) 8 FCR 388 applied DPP Reference under s 693A of the Criminal Code; Re Y & Ors (1998) 100 A Crim R 166 considered
Date of hearing: 9 June 2011
Place: Brisbane
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate