Purcell v Deputy Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1920] HCA 46

28 C.L.R.) OF AUSTRALIA.

(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.)

THOMAS PURCELL . : . 3 P . APPELLANT ; AND

THE DEPUTY FEDERAL COMMISSIONER | OF TAXATION. ' ete es RESPONDENT.

Sale Act 1891 (Qd.) (55 Viet, No. 23), secs. 3, 4.

The Bills of Sale Act of 1891 (Qd.) provides, by secs, 3 and 4, that until registered in the manner prescribed by that Act, bills of sale (including, inter alia, declarations of trust of chattels without transfer) under which the holder or grantee has power, either with or without notice, and either immediately or at any future time, to seize or take possession of any chattels comprised therein or made subject thereto, shall not have any effect.

An owner declared himself a trustee of certain property (including chattels) for himself, his wife and his daughter (the interest of the daughter being settled). In declaring the trust he reserved to himself exclusive powers of management and disposition. The declaration was not registered under the Bills of Sale Act.

Held, that the declaration of trust was valid and binding upon the settlor, on the ground that it was not a declaration of trust of chattels within the meaning of the Bills of Sale Act—by Knox C.J., Duffy and Rich JJ., because neither the wife nor the daughter had power under the deed to seize or take possession of the chattels comprised therein ; by Isaacs J., because the deed 'operated, if at all, only as a gift of shares of the settlor's profits arising from the business.

SPECIAL CASE. 'The appellant, Thomas Purcell, was a grazier in Queensland, and early in 1916 was the owner of a station known as Galway Downs,

Bill of Sale—Declaration of Trust—Validity—Effect of non-registration—Bills of H.C. ow A.

1920. ~ Brisbane, June 24. Sypyey, Aug. 14.

Fnox C.J. Tsaacs,

Gavan and Rich JJ.

H.C. or A.

1920. ~~ PurRcELL v Deputy FepErau Commis- SIONER OF 'TaxaTION.