Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
La Mancha Africa S.A.R.L. v Commissioner of Taxation (No 2) [2022] FCA 131 File number(s): VID 778 of 2020
Judgment of: DAVIES J
Date of judgment: 21 February 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where addressee of subpoena seeks confidentiality regime in relation to commercially sensitive material – where addressee's regime addresses matters that are otherwise adequately protected by the obligations that exist by operation of law. COSTS – where the Commissioner seeks its costs following the Court's judgment – where addressee sought costs of preparing evidence in relation to confidentiality of subpoenaed material – whether the Court should depart from usual order that costs follow the event – where addressee alleged matter in the nature of a "test case" – no basis to depart from usual order as to costs.
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 37AG Federal Court Rules 2011, Pt 24 Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth), Pt IVC, Sch 1 Div 355
Cases cited: Cadbury Pty Ltd v Amcor Limited (No 2) [2009] FCA 663 Oshlack v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Taxation
Number of paragraphs: 10
Date of last submissions: 11 February 2022
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
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