According to the case background, an airline pilot named Mr. Bond employed by Qantas was needed to hold a license for flying by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). Apart from this, he also needed a current medical certificate, which was appropriate for the license. He held the license above for several years. About 6th OCT. 2005, Mr. Bond was seen that he was suffering from neuropsychological weakening (Woellner, 2013). Hence he could not attain the medical certificate and the required license. Consequently, he was suspended from his duties on 10th of OCT. 2005. Apart from this, during 2005 and 2007 Mr. Bond has attended several test and consultation with different medical experts.
He had consulted with many Human Resources Staffs of Qantas Airways as well as with a senior Fight captain of Qantas about the possibility of predicting a ground role with Qantas. Those HR staffs plus the flight captain keenly encouraged him to carry on a substitute position within Qantas. Owing to the probability of the reemployment to a ground duty, he did an aviation safety and risk management course at RMIT University in Melbourne (Woellner, 2007). He also applied for the post of Aviation Safety Inspector with aviation company Qantas Airways where he was working as a pilot. He applied for the post on 26th Jan. 2007. However, finally, his application was rejected by the aviation company.
According to the Qantas Airways Ltd Flight Crew Certificate Agreement 2002 (SHCA), the aviation company gave loss of license insurance. Moreover, under this agreement, Mr. Bond had got a LOL payment for loss of his license on the medical ground (Woellner et al., 2016). When he lost his license of the pilot the pertinent insurance policy, the license reinsurance policy was between Qantas Airways and Scottish Re Ltd.
According to Scottish Re Policy, the insurance company covered Qantas oppose arising from Qantas responsibility to give Loss of license benefits as per the contract. Mr. Bond had pointed that the insurance company does not need that a pilot’s employment must terminate prior Qantas would be responsible for paying LOL payment.
On February 2007, it was diagnosed that Mr. Bond was suffering from the cognitive disorder. On 14th March 2007, CASA informed that Mr. Bond had unsuccessful to meet the medical standard for retaining the pilot license (Carter, 2011).
The laws that are depicted to be showing the payment that results in the termination of the employment and also the receiving of the payment is being made within the twelve months of the termination as per the Section 82-130 is being undertaken. The Section 82-130 simply defines that the payment is not an ETP if it is being received in respect of the personal injury and also the payment is determined to be reasonable as the effect is likely to be determined by showing the capacity of the deriving income from the personal exertion (ATO, 2015). If the termination payment is seemed to be exempted by the Section 82-135, then it is not taxable in nature. The determination of the breaching of the contract is undertaken in the form is illustrated from the above point.
The other propositions that are forwarded by the Mr. Bond as per the cascading of the sequence are shown by the ATC 16898 provides the following points which are as follows:-
Therefore the laws are very much important as it is being made by illustrating the enhancement of the workforce for the development of the issues. The further enhancement of the communication can be easily made by receiving the letter which is being made by showing the enhancement of the Qantas which is being made by showing the expansion of the work and also the claim is being improved by showing the insurer. Also, the signing and the returning of the deed is being made by releasing the topic in an appropriate way. Thus it simply describes the workforce which is being shown to be explaining the work and also it is being explained by showing the illustration of the work, and it is being made by showing the signing of the work (Donaghey, 2013). The formation of the returns is being made by showing the illustration of the work in explanation of the work which is being made by showing the pictures of the work. On the 25th March, the Mr Bond is being made by showing the explanation of the work and also it comprises of the payment which is also explaining the work structure is being made by showing the explanation of the tax payment and also the implementation is being made by showing the enhancement of the work (Engdahl, 2011).
The commissioner measured the LOL payment to the plaintiff MR. Bond because of an ETP under ITAA 1997 Section 82-130 as it suitably uses under section 82-130 (1((a)(i) to a payment in case of:
(i) in the result of the termination of employment
Mr. Bond ineffectively objected to the measurement. Mr. Bond afterward sought an audit for the examination by the tribunal, where numerous other issues pertinent to the element that state that the LOL payment receipts by Mr. Bond must be assessable income. The tribunal detects six issues, which are raised by Mr. Bond. Moreover, these are the similar issues which are raised by him on the appeal protect the issues five as well as six prior the tribunal have been focused on the issues (5) set out in (3) aforementioned (Prince, 2016). Every single issue was judged badly to Mr. Bond.
Finally, there is willingly recognized plus direct communication between the stages in the Tribunal’s reasoning the deliberation of the problems on this specific appeal. It is hence essential to refer distinctly to the tribunal purpose just briefly as they will or else inform the deliberation the issue on this appeal.
The commission imposed that the LOL payment obtained by Mr. Bond was under the taxation consideration under the ITAA 1997 because it used under massive payment received by someone else. In the consequences of the termination of the service, that Mr. Bond inefficiently objected to the evaluation Mr. Bond after that required an analysis of the tribunal decision, where numerous issues applicable to whether entire part of the LOL payment must be an assessable income. The tribunal judgments are identified as six problems that it moves up by Mr. Bond. It was raised by the plaintiff Mr. Bond on the same issue plus request that protect the issues prior the tribunal judgment have been identified as those issues. Every single issue was decided badly to Mr. Bond. As per the acknowledgment plus direct combination between the issues in the tribunal judgment or decision that needed being dealt with on the appeal (Ross, 2010). It is important to refer unrelated to the tribunal’s decision which purposes can be clear because they will or else notify the thought of the matter on that application. Mr. Bond got a payment in that audit of ensured annual leave permission plus long services leave. However, he did not get any types of payment regarding his sick leave which shattered the entitlement. The relevant legislation is referred to the tribunal decision. After the further link between them, Mr. Bond got a letter which was confirming the claim which has been accepted by the later insurer. Besides this, the tribunal referred based on the evidence of Mr. Bond plus other on his application overview. The evidence of the entire is referred by Captain Kearns while consulting a consultant. There was no pertinent of findings which created by that the oral evidence that is overviewed are directly material to the current appeal of the problems. Afterward, the tribunal judgment referred to the regarding submission that is in consequence addressed in the similar appeal problem issues risen (Woellner, 2005). The tribunal can be referred to the evidence that MR Bond plus others on his audit application. There was excessive documentary evidence, because of the tribunal heard together with the audit claims by Mr. Bond along with two other pilots whose payment of LOL were assessed by the commissioners in the same ways. There are not any findings that made on that oral evidence that perceived as direct material to the current appeal. Afterward, the tribunal called to the particular submission plus in consequent addresses the problems raised.
The critical Analysis is being made by showing the explanation of the subject which is being made by showing the explanation of the affect which is being made by showing the direct affect on the final decision of the court. Therefore the decision and the reason for the decisions are critically analyzed by showing the supporting of the each decision. The information is being made by showing the gathering of the information which is being gathered on the facts based on the Tribunal necessity. The case is depicted to be dependent on the outside as it is being made by showing the explanation of the LOL payment with respect to the structure and also the relation is being directly or indirectly employed in the form of the rendered services and also the meaning is being explained by the Section 15-2 of the ITAA 1997 (Gibson and Fraser, 2013). This is showing the explanation of the tribunal erred in the law and also the direct finding of the amount assessable in the form of showing the referral Section of the 15-2. Therefore the benefit is being explained by showing the explanation of the amount of the LOL payment which is being received by the applicant. Therefore the LOL payment is being otherwise assessable by showing the section of 5-2 and also erred in the law of failing of the law by showing the explanation of the work. If the LOL payment is being made in the form of the fringe benefit, the benefit of the meaning can be easily explained by showing the Section 136(1) of the FBTAA 1986. Therefore the Section 23L f the ITAA 1936 is being included for the purpose of treating the explanation of the response and also it is being explained in the form of the non-accessible in which is being exempted by showing the income in the hands of the applicant.
Therefore the alternatively to the 12.1, the tribunal erred in law in deciding law and also the disregarded under the section 118-37(1)(b). Thus the construction is being explained by the decisions that are made for the taxes that are submitted by the MR bond. The Section 82-130 is being prescribed when the payment is shown to be in the form of the employment termination payment. It is relevant as both Mr. Bond and the commissioner agrees that the direct coordination is being directly informed in the form of the study which is being made by showing the consequence of the termination (Krever, 2007). Thus it simply explains the structure of the study which is being explained by showing the explanation of the termination of the work. This is being explained by showing the termination of the employees of the Qantas and also the tribunals are referred to the Reseck v Commissioner of Taxation (1975) 133 CLR 45. This case simply justifies the critical decisions that are undertaken in this case and also the explanation of the work which is being made in the form of the direct payments that are made in this case. The explanation simply shows the severance of the payments as it is being explained in this study and also the termination of the contract is being justified by the help of this case study. This shows the illustrations of the case which can be easily made by showing the opinion of the necessary termination made for the dominant causes of the payment (Lakshmanan, 2015).
Conclusion
The overall discussions are showing the illustrations of the work by showing the tribunals are appropriately erred on the questions. The laws are showing the affect on the conclusion which is being apparent from the final consideration as undertaken for the study. The issues are showing the explanation of the work which is being made by showing the proper structure of the work. It simply explains the outcomes of the significant respects of the issues raised in this case. The formal addressing is not shown by showing the addressing the commissioners objection to the competency and also the substantial question is being made by showing the relation of the questions (Martin, 2011). The appeal of the competent is being made by showing the illustrations in the form of the contention which was made by the commissioner. This simply explains the dismissing of the appeal which is being made to the court and also the parties are required to bear the cost as it is being provided in this case.
References
ATO (2015). Legal database – View: Cases: Bond v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation – (25 March 2015) (25 March 2015). [online] Ato.gov.au. Available at:
https://www.ato.gov.au/law/view/document?data-src=hs&pit=99991231235958&arc=false&start=31&pageSize=10&total=952&num=9&docid=JUD%2F2015ATC20-499%2F00001&dc=false&tm=and-basic-weeks%20v%20FC%20of%20T [Accessed 25 May 2017].
Carter, J. (2011). Australian income tax legislation. 1st ed. North Ryde, N.S.W.: CCH Australia.
Carter, J. (2013). Contract law in Australia. Chatswood: LexisNexis Butterworths.
Chow, M. (2015). Australian master tax guide 2015. CCH Australia.
Donaghey, T. (2013). Termination of employment. [Chatswood, N.S.W.]: LexisNexis Butterworths.
Engdahl, S. (2011). Taxation. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.
Gibson, A. and Fraser, D. (2013). Business law 2013. Frenchs Forest, N.S.W.: Pearson Australia.
Krever, R. (2007). Australian taxation law cases 2007. Pyrmont, N.S.W.: Lawbook.
Lakshmanan, J. (2015). Taxation laws. [Place of publication not identified]: Universal Law Publishing.
Martin, D. (2011). The A-Z of employment practice. London: Thorogood.
Prince, J. (2016). Tax for australians for dummies. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
Ross, J. (2010). Employment law. Dundee: Dundee University Press.
Woellner, R. (2005). Australian taxation law 2006. Sydney, N.S.W.: CCH Australia.
Woellner, R. (2013). Australian taxation law 2012. North Ryde [N.S.W.]: CCH Australia.
Woellner, R. (2007). 2007 Australian taxation law. North Ryde, N.S.W.: CCH Australia.
Woellner, R., Barkoczy, S., Murphy, S., Evans, C. and Pinto, D. (2016). Australian Taxation Law 2016. Melbourne, Vic.: Oxford University Press.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download