ADVANCES TO SON

Wairarapa Times-Age, 25 June 1940, Page 7

ADVANCES TO SON

APPEAL BY COMMISSIONER. FEATHERSTON CASE. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. An appeal by the Commissioner of Stamp Duties against a judgment byMr Justice Johnston allowing an appeal by John Wiltshire Card, solicitor. Featherston, against the Commissioner of Stamp Duties, was heard by the Court, of Appeal yesterday. The Cour.t comprised the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers). Mr Justice Ostler. Mr Justice Smith and Mr Justice Fair. Mr P. B. Broad appeared for appellant, and Mr C. Evans-Scott for respondent. Mr Justice Johnston in his judgment, said: “From this case, stated under Section 62 of the Death Duties' Act. 1921. it appears that the Commissioner or Stamp Duties treated as gifts certain advances made by Card to his son, free of interest and the real question that emergenes from the argument is whether an advance in the form of a lean secured by mortgage of property, but free of interest.' is a disposition of property, as defined by Section 39 of the Act, and, for the purposes of the Act. a gift. If this question is answered otherwise than in the negative, the further question arises whether, in this particular case, there was or was not given adequate consideration other than a promise to pay interest.” Mr Justice Johnston allowed Card's appeal. and said the assessment insofar as it proceeded on the assumption that the interest-free advances were gifts must be amended. The commsisioner in his last assessment on February 29 last assessed the amount payable in gift duty at £606 17s 6d. Mr Broad, for appellant, said the question at issue was whether an advance made free of interest was a gift. He said that judges and counsel had frequently drawn attention to the fact that the law required amending, but this had not been done since 1911. Mr Evans-Scott submitted that the advances made by Card to his son were not gifts. They were not dispositions of property as defined by Section 29 of the Act, and ;h-;v were made for adequate considera-.mn. The advances did not diminish Card':: estate. nor did they- increase his son's estate.. I; dia not lie in the power of the Commissioner of Stamp Duties to say whether a man should or should not charge interest on loans. Tms was the first time that gift duty had. been claimed on such a transactin'. After hearing counsel the Chief Justice intimated that judgment would be reserved.