The loss of a taxpayer's entire estate and consequent inability to prosecute appeals against tax assessments is capable of constituting 'extreme personal hardship' justifying a stay of execution of a judgment for unpaid tax. Whether particular circumstances amount to extreme personal hardship is a question of fact and judgment, not of law. The remarks in Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Ho (1996) 32 ATR 269, suggesting that bankruptcy and loss of appeal rights cannot constitute extreme personal hardship, are obiter dicta and do not represent the law. The principles distilled by Nathan J in Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Akers (1989) 89 ATC 4725 provide the authoritative framework for exercising the discretion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 16 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.