The High Court has refused special leave to appeal from the decision of the Full Federal Court in Belconnen Lakeview Pty Ltd v Lloyd [2021] FCAFC 187. In that case, a Canberra developer had incorrectly claimed that the sale of a unit in the ACT was subject to GST, and faced a consumer law action that it amounted to misleading or deceptive conduct (see related TT article). While the case was more about consumer law than GST, some interesting observations were also made about GST issues.
The decision that now stands, is the latter of these two.
The Federal Court, at first instance, held that the sale contract was not amended, by the vendor, to reflect the change in the GST treatment, from a taxable supply to input taxed – and awarded an amount of $29,914 amount as “restitutionary relief”: Lloyd v Belconnen Lakeview Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 698 (see related TT article).
On appeal, the Full Court held that any misleading or deceptive conduct did not cause loss or damage to the purchaser (ie over-ruling the first instance decision). The Full Court stated that it was not established that, had the purchaser been apprised of the true position (ie that the supply would be an input taxed supply rather than a taxable supply) in the period between the date of the contract and the date of settlement, she would have taken steps to renegotiate the purchase price.
[Tax Month – April 2022 – Previous Month, 1.5.22] [LTN 74, 21/4/22]