SGH Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2002] HCA 18

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,

GAUDRON, McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE AND CALLINAN JJ

SGH LIMITED (formerly known as APPLICANT

Suncorp Building Society Limited)

AND

THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION RESPONDENT

SGH Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation

[2002] HCA 18

Date of Order: 6 December 2001

Date of Publication of Reasons: 1 May 2002

B19/2001

ORDER

1) The questions reserved for consideration by the Full Court are answered as follows:

Question (a): Whether SGH Limited is the "State" for the purposes of

s 114 of the Constitution?

Answer: No.

Question (b): Whether the tax in question is a "tax on property" for the

purposes of s 114 of the Constitution?

Answer: Unnecessary to answer.

2) Costs to be determined by the Justice dealing with the further conduct of the cause.

Representation:

D F Jackson QC with J D McKenna for the applicant (instructed by Clayton Utz)

D M J Bennett QC, Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth with J A Logan SC and M L Robertson for the respondent (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)

Interveners:

P A Keane QC, Solicitor-General of the State of Queensland with G R Cooper and C A Watt intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General of the State of Queensland (instructed by Crown Solicitor for the State of Queensland)

D Graham QC, Solicitor-General for the State of Victoria with M K Moshinsky intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General for the State of Victoria (instructed by Victorian Government Solicitor)

R J Meadows QC, Solicitor-General for the State of Western Australia with F Sunderland intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia (instructed by Crown Solicitor for the State of Western Australia)