Dickson v Commissioner of Taxation (NSW)

(1925) 36 CLR 489
26 SR(NSW) 292
42 WN(NSW) 155
[1925] R & McG 168
31 ALR 393

---

(Judgment by: Rich J)

Between: Dickson
And: Commissioner of Taxation (NSW)

Court:

Judges: Knox CJ
Isaacs J
Higgins J

Rich JStarke J

Subject References:
Income tax (NSW)

Judgment date: 24 August 1925

---

Judgment by:
Rich J

The jurisdiction of this Court is to do what the Supreme Court could have done. That Court has only such jurisdiction in this matter as can be found in the statute enabling the case to be stated. Sec. 32 of that statute distinctly restricts the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to questions of law. This Court has been very firm in insisting that where the jurisdiction is so restrictively defined it cannot be exceeded even by finding inferences of fact unless that power is expressly given. Because that power was expressly given in the Mount Morgan Case, I acted upon it (see that case (1922-23) 33 CLR, at p 98 and Order XXXVIII., rule 1, Queensland Rules of the Supreme Court). There is no permission given by any Act to draw inferences in this case and I agree that, if it were necessary to add anything by way of inference to the facts stated, it would be beyond my competency to make the addition. In my opinion, however, all necessary facts, including inferences, can be found included in the case stated by the learned Judge of the Court of Review. The sum total of the matter is, if not exactly, yet substantially, the same as what took place in the Mount Morgan Case. Whatever differences exist are not, in my opinion, sufficient to alter the result either commercially or legally. I therefore think the questions should be answered as follows: (1) No; (2) Yes; (3) Yes. (at p508)