Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd
Linked as:
Extract
Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd
No longer available (Autolink)
See the full content of this document
Core Citations
DISTINGUISHES
- Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
- Ling v Commonwealth
- Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
[See more]
DISAPPROVES
REFERS TO
- Quistclose Investments Ltd v Rolls Razor Ltd ((in Liquidation))
- Tanu Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation
- Stephens v R
CONSIDERS
CITES
- Howard Smith & Company Ltd v Varawa
- Panorama Developments (Guildford) Ltd v Fidelis Furnishing Fabrics Ltd
- Hospital Products Ltd v United States Surgical Corporation
[See more]
COMMENTS
APPLIES
- Ha v New South Wales; Walter Hammond & Associates v New South Wales
- Bp Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Hastings Shire Council
- Baltic Shipping Company v Dillon
[See more]
REPORTED OPINION OF in
CITED in
- Burns v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd (Gd)
- Re Opes Prime Stockbroking Ltd
- Fenwick v Wambo Coal Pty Ltd (No. 3)
[See more]
CONSIDERED in
- Suntory (Aust) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation
- Electric Life Pty Ltd v Unison Finance Group Pty Ltd
- Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust v South Sydney City Council
[See more]
REFERRED in
- Australian Capital Territory v Queanbeyan City Council
- Haxton v Equuscorp Pty Ltd (formerly Equus Financial Services Ltd)
DISTINGUISHED in
APPEAL RESOLVED in
REVERSED in
This document cites
- Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
- Dimskal Shipping Company SA v International Transport Workers Federation (The Evia Luck)
- Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
- Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council
- Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council
