Industrial Court of New South Wales CITATION: Georkas v Stephen Streeting and anor (No 2) [2007] NSWIRComm 220 APPLICANT: Constantinos Andreas Georkas (Dinos Georkas) PARTIES: FIRST RESPONDENT: Stephen Streeting SECOND RESPONDENT: Charger Pty Limited FILE NUMBER(S): 1582 of 2006 CORAM: Marks J CATCHWORDS: S106 proceedings - whether GST payable on compensation awarded - applicant did not provide any services during notional compensated period - therefore no GST payable - respondents to pay cost of motion LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996 s106 GST 2001/4 (ATO) HEARING DATES: 20 August 2007 EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 20 August 2007 APPLICANT: Mr M Heath (c) Solicitor: LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Mr C Serow Rice, More & Gibson Solicitors RESPONDENTS: Unrepresented JUDGMENT: INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: Marks J Monday 20 August 2007 Matter No IRC 1582 of 2006 Georkas v Stephen Streeting and anor (No 2) Application under s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 Judgment on Notice of Motion EX- TEMPORE JUDGMENT [2007] NSWIRComm 220 1 The applicant was successful in a claim brought by him under s106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 against the respondents, Stephen Streeting and Charger Pty Limited. I gave judgment in that matter on 3 July 2007. (See [2007\ NSW IRComm 160.) 2 There remained outstanding the question whether GST was payable on moneys which I ordered the respondents to pay to the applicant in matter number IRC1582 of 2006. Those moneys consisted of four months of moneys that would have been paid if the respondents had not terminated the applicant's services. 3 I granted leave with respect to the application of GST to these moneys to allow the parties to give consideration to the matter. The respondents failed to respond to communications forwarded to them by the applicant's solicitors seeking to consult on this matter as directed by me in my judgment. This gave rise to the filing of a Notice of Motion by the applicant seeking further orders. 4 Having considered submissions by Mr Heath, of counsel, who continues to appear for the applicant today, and having considered well known authorities with respect to the application of taxation to moneys awarded by way of compensation and the Goods and Services Tax ruling GST2001/4 issued by the ATO, I have concluded that GST is not payable on the four months award of compensation. This is because the applicant has provided no supply of any services to the respondent during this four months period. It must follow, therefore, as a matter of logic, that GST is not payable on these moneys. Accordingly, I am now able to finalise the monetary amount payable pursuant to order 2 of my earlier judgment. 5 The respondents are jointly and severely liable to pay the applicant a sum of $17,050 which includes GST payable on an amount of $3,850. Of course, the applicant remains entitled to interest on these moneys in accordance with my earlier judgment and to the payment of costs. 6 Having regard to the failure of the respondents to reply to the approach made by the applicant's solicitors, as contemplated by my earlier judgment, the respondents should, in addition, pay the applicant's cost of this motion in an amount as assessed under the Legal Profession Act in default of agreement. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.