Australian Rice Holdings Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue

[2004] VSCA 17

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Revenue Law
2. › Stamp duty
3. › Conveyance on sale of land
4. › Chattels sold with land
5. › Water rights sold with primary production land
6. › Whether value of water rights to be taken into account in assessing duty
7. › Whether 'chattels' bears same meaning in duty-imposing and exemption provisions
8. › Stamps Act 1958 (Vic), s 63(3) and (4)
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Same word in same section of statute
3. › Presumption of consistent meaning
4. › Whether word bears same meaning in consecutive subsections
5. › Rebuttal of presumption
6. › Stamps Act 1958 (Vic), s 63(3)(a) and (4)(a)
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Ejusdem generis
3. › General words following specific examples
4. › Whether general words limited by specific examples or vice versa
5. › 'Stock, implements or other chattels'
6. › Stamps Act 1958 (Vic), s 63(4)(a)

Quick Take

Under the Stamps Act 1958 (Vic), 'chattels' bears the same meaning in both the duty-imposing provision (s 63(3)(a)) and the primary production exemption (s 63(4)(a)), so that water rights sold with primary production land are either not caught by the former or are excepted by the latter. The specific examples of 'stock' and 'implements' in s 63(4)(a) do not restrict the general words 'other chattels' that follow. The Stamps Act has been repealed and replaced by the Duties Act, which uses 'goods' rather than 'chattels'. The question whether 'chattels' includes intangible property was expressly left open.