âVery uncomfortable positionâ: ATO wonât rule out criminal charges in PwC legal stoush
Save
Normal text size
Advertisement
PwC partners could face criminal charges over the auditing giantâs use of a legal shield to withhold information from the Australian Tax Office, in a move that may affect how âbig fourâ consulting firms approach corporate tax advice.
The ATO launched a civil lawsuit against PwC and meat processing company JBS last year after it refused to hand over corporate information during a tax audit, citing legal professional privilege.
Now, PwCâs lawyers are deciding whether to seek a stay order after the ATO raised the possibility of criminal charges over the same matter.
This monthly report is compiled and briefly summarised by a group of lawyers on a voluntary basis for the benefit of readers of The Edge.
Please consult your own lawyers if you need advice on the cases, issues and related matters highlighted here.
Federal Court (‘FC’) sets guidelines with respect to its power to review its own decisions
The FC, being the apex Court of the country, is not bound by its own decisions. In hearing an appeal proper, the FC may depart from its earlier decisions. In reviewing its own decisions, the FC must be satisfied that the case is fit for review in that it falls within the limited grounds and very exceptional circumstances. Examples include coram failure or the panel of the FC was improperly constituted, breach of natural justice, or when bias is established. These examples fall within the meaning of ‘manifest miscarriage of justice’. To expand the category of cases beyond ‘manifest miscarriage of justice’, or giving a broad or unrest