The conduct of the Australian Taxation Office in litigation

Here is an audio overview that features a deep-dive discussion between two people regarding the conduct of the ATO and its legal representatives (AGS and Clayton Utz) during litigation .

The discussion focuses on several key instances:

• Omission of Evidence: The failure to include crucial documents, such as the Higham Minute of 29 July 1997, in sworn discovery lists despite specific court orders.
• False Justifications for Delay: The AGS claiming a witness was on "sick leave" to explain a delay in providing a discovery list, while subsequent billing records do not reflect such an absence.
• Billing Discrepancies: The inclusion of costs for a meeting between counsel and the applicant that the applicant's personal work diary shows could not have occurred, as he was on leave at the time.
• Resiling from Undertakings: The AGS initially providing a written undertaking to substantiate their bills of costs using their files, only to later file submissions seeking to maintain legal professional privilege over those same documents.

Listen to the podcast "ATO Misconduct in Litigation"

Watch "The ATO Litigation Paper Trail" - and see how many times the Australian Taxation Office and its legal representatives slip up - and thumb their noses at the the legal system.

The Australian Taxation Office drives over the 'model' litigant obligation. Then stops, and reverses over it to make sure its quite dead.