Event and Time
Event Description
This case involves an appeal by Resolute Mining Ltd concerning the assessment of transfer duty on a Funding Agreement related to the transfer of land (the Existing Site) from the State of Queensland. The core issue is whether the consideration payable for this transaction could be ascertained at the time the duty liability arose.
Application and Claims
- Appellant (Resolute): Claims that the consideration for the transfer of the land could not be determined at the time the liability for transfer duty arose; therefore, duty should be assessed based on the unencumbered value of the land.
- Respondent (Commissioner of State Revenue): Argues that the consideration is ascertainable and should be based on the Funding Amount stated in the contract.
Judicial Decisions
The court had to examine: 1. If the consideration was ascertainable at the time of the transfer duty liability arising (19 November 2018). 2. Whether the duty should be calculated based on the Funding Amount or the unencumbered value of the land.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Resolute's Contentions:
- The Funding Amount of $8,398,767.20 plus GST may increase through contingent payments related to Cost Overrun Payments. - The net payable amount could not be determined until project completion, as it depended on several items including potential refunds and reimbursements.
- Commissioner’s Contentions:
- The Funding Amount is fixed and thus constitutes the consideration for the transfer. The unanticipated components should not alter the basic assessment for transfer duty. - Reference to the “contingency principle” from common law to support that duty is based on the prima facie amount at execution, irrespective of potential later adjustments.