Source: The Tax Specialist Journal Article
Published Date: 1 Jun 2012
The recent decision of the High Court in ALH Group Property Holdings Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue examined two fundamental aspects of Australian property law, namely, when does a purchaser under a cancelled contract for sale of land become entitled to a refund of the duty paid on it, and when can a contract for sale be said to have been novated by its vendor and original purchaser to a new purchaser, as distinct from having been assigned to the new purchaser?
This article analyses the decision and its broader implications in detail. In the author’s view, the decision is of critical importance for property lawyers, and also for tax practitioners who are engaged in making, varying and cancelling contracts for their clients, because of the stamp duty consequences of a novation of the parties’ contractual rights on their statutory obligations to pay stamp duty on the contracts.
Case note: renunciation of beneficial interests in trusts since FCT v Carter - Journal 01 Oct 2022
A new approach to statutory interpretation by the Full Federal Court or merely a mistaken approach? - Journal 01 Feb 2021
Difficulties in settling disputes with the Commissioner of Taxation - Journal 01 Jul 2019
Is the deemed in-house asset rule unconstitutional? - Journal 01 Nov 2018
An independent ATO appeals group is long overdue - Journal 01 Aug 2018
Merits review of state tax decisions by a court - Journal 01 Dec 2011
Dominant purpose: The Holy Grail of tax advisers - Journal 01 Oct 2011
Removal of the CGT trust cloning exemption - Journal 01 Mar 2009
Recent developments in payroll tax and land tax - Presentation 29 Mar 2006
Sorry, this is subscriber only content.
To gain access to this material and much more - Subscribe Now.
(Note: Members can access Taxation in Australia journal articles without a Tax Knowledge Exchange subscription - please log in to access).
Already a Subscriber? Login now
The material is copyright. Apart any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research criticism or review, as permitted under the copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from The Tax Institute.
Unless expressly stated, opinions are not that of The Tax Institute, which accepts no responsibility for the accuracy of any of the information contained within it.
The Tax Institute
(ABN 45 008 392 372 (PRV14016))
The Tax Institute is a Recognised Tax Agent Association (RTAA) under the Tax Agent Services Regulations 2009.
All materials provided on this site are protected by copyright and are owned by or licensed to TTI.
Except as expressly permitted by TTI or the copyright owner, any person or company who uses this site must not use, reproduce, redistribute, retransmit, publish or otherwise transfer, or commercially exploit, the materials or any information, software or other content, in whole or in part, which is available through this site.