Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Victorian Hardware Club [1931] HCA 17; (1931) 45 CLR 406 (6 May 1931)

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

The Federal Commissioner of Taxation Plaintiff, Appellant; and The Victorian Hardware Club Defendant, Respondent.

H C of A

6 May 1931

Rich, Starke, Dixon, Evatt and McTiernan JJ.

Fullagar, for the appellant.

Sholl, for the respondent,

The following judgments were delivered:—

Rich J.

I think the facts in this case show that the function or diversion, to use a neutral term, was not an entertainment within the meaning of the Act. If the function is separated into two parts, the trip in the boat admittedly was not an entertainment. But it was the only part for which "payment" was made. The picnic in the park was not an entertainment. No "payment" was made for it. The persons who went in the boat might or might not go into the park. Persons outside the Club and not participators in the function, who had not travelled by the boat, might have gone into the park—a public park—and joined in the function. But Mr. Fullagar says we must combine the two factors and treat the matter as a whole. Be it so, the combination cannot be said to be an entertainment for which payment was made by a spectator or member of the audience. I think the Magistrate came to the right conclusion, and that the order nisi should be discharged with costs.

Starke J.

There was no entertainment in this case.

Dixon J.

I concur. I think the Magistrate was entitled to find that there was no payment for admission to an entertainment within the meaning given to those words by sec. 2 of the Entertainments Tax Assessment Act 1916-1924. I do not think that those who bought tickets could be said to have made payments for admission as spectators or members of an audience to an entertainment.

Evatt J.

In my opinion the tickets were sold to enable the holders to have a day's outing at the seaside for themselves and their children. Boat transport was the essential thing, and the "attractions" at Sorrento were subordinate. What was paid for was not an entertainment and, if there was any entertainment at Sorrento, it was not paid for.

McTiernan J.

I agree.

Order nisi discharged.

Solicitor for the Commissioner of Taxation, W. H. Sharwood, Crown Solicitor for the Commonwealth.

Solicitor for the respondent, Eggleston & Eggleston.