The Full Federal Court accepted the submissions of the Commissioner that none of the grounds advanced by Gordon J for distinguishing Maddalena justified not applying Maddalena to Spriggs and Riddell. Further, having regard to Gordon J’s unchallenged findings that the fees in each case were paid for negotiating the employment contract: in Spriggs, the contract with the Sydney Swans and in Riddell, the contract with Parramatta, the Full Federal Court held that the fees were not incurred "in" gaining or producing assessable income, in the sense of being incurred "in the course of" deriving the employment income within the first positive limb of s 8-1. In relation to the second limb, the Full Federal Court said, at para 49:
"If, as we believe to be the case, any business carried on by the respondent in the relevant year of income is confined to his non-playing activities, then an outgoing entirely incurred in negotiating and concluding a playing contract of employment, which on the evidence subsumes the whole of the playing activities, is not incurred in the course of carrying on that business."
In relation to the Commissioner's assertion that each of the cases was "a test case", the Court said at para 51:
"During the hearing of the appeal, we were informed by Senior Counsel for the Commissioner that each of these cases is a test case. The question which immediately arises is: a test case as to what? Our conclusion that the CSM fee is not an allowable deduction to Spriggs in the 2005 year of income and that the SFX fee is not an allowable deduction to Riddell in the same year is predicated on the finding, supported by the evidence and not challenged on appeal, that each fee was paid entirely for negotiating the employment contract: in Spriggs, the contract with the Sydney Swans and in Riddell, the contract with Parramatta. In this regard, our conclusion says nothing, nor should it be taken to say anything, about the deductibility of fees paid by professional sportsmen to managers and agents for their services which cannot be so confined."
FCT v Spriggs  FCAFC 150 (Full Federal Court; Goldberg, Bennett and Edmonds JJ; 22 August 2008).
For a copy of the decision, go here