Between: Sun Newspapers Ltd - Appellant
And: Federal Commissioner of Taxation - Respondent
Between: Associated Newspapers Ltd - Appellant
And: Federal Commissioner of Taxation - Respondent

Judges: Rich J (previous judgment)
Latham CJ
Dixon J

McTiernan J

Judgment by:
McTiernan J

I agree that the appeal should be dismissed. In my opinion the judgment of Rich J. was right and I agree with his reasons. I have had the opportunity of reading the reasons for judgment of the Chief Justice and Dixon J., and I agree with them. There is nothing which I wish to add except to quote a passage from the judgment of Lawrence J. in Collins v. Joseph Adamson & Co. ^[F32] , a case cited by Rich J. from the report in the Times Law Reports ^[F33] :- "From the case" (Southwell v. Savill Brothers Ltd. ^[F34] ) " I think it may be deduced that you cannot test the question whether the payment is properly a capital or a revenue payment by seeing whether it can be shown to be productive. Nor do I think that the argument of Mr. King, that what was produced by the expenditure in the present cases was impalpable or intangible or incalculable is a sound argument for holding that is must be treated as of revenue nature. In fact ...the payments which were made had as a result the removal or the prevention of a trade competitor." In my opinion it may be said of the payment now in question, as Lawrence J. said of the payments in question in Collins v. Joseph Adamson & Co. ^[F35] , that it created for the taxpayer "advantages of an enduring nature, and, I think, of such an enduring nature as properly to be treated as capital, and not to be treated as revenue."

Appeals dismissed with costs.