High Court

, , , ,

FCT v Carter: trust disclaimers not effective for tax

, , , ,
FCT v Carter: trust disclaimers not effective for tax

In one sense, the High Court judgment in FCT v Carter [2022] HCA 10 (Carter) will come as welcome relief for tax advisors. That is, after dealing with the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) view of the ‘lore’ in the form of practical compliance guidelines, Carter turns minds back to the ‘law.’ Unfortunately, the law in Carter can result in unpleasant tax outcomes for certain trust beneficiaries.

, ,

Sladen snippet – High Court refuses leave to appeal finding that dentist is covered by super guarantee

, ,
Sladen snippet – High Court refuses leave to appeal finding that dentist is covered by super guarantee

As discussed here, the decision in Dental Corporation Pty Ltd v Moffet [2020] FCAFC 118 (16 June 2020) (Moffet) marked an important shift in how the courts have interpreted the employee/contractor distinction for the purposes of superannuation guarantee obligations.

Sladen Snippet - Sweet victory for Mondelez after High Court rules on the meaning of ‘day’ for personal / carer’s leave

Sladen Snippet - Sweet victory for Mondelez after High Court rules on the meaning of ‘day’ for personal / carer’s leave

In a significant victory for Australian employers, the High Court has ruled in favour of Cadbury manufacturer Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd clarifying the meaning of the word “day” in the context of personal/carer’s leave entitlements under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act).