Ruling on expenses against tax

Press, 13 June 1986, Page 26

Ruling on expenses against tax

PA Auckland A woman who fought a two-year legal battle against dismissal from the Public Service cannot claim legal expenses against tax.

The Taxation Review Authority has ruled that her court and legal costs were not employmentrelated expenses because the money was spent questioning her dismissal and not making money.

The woman worked in a State department office for about 10 y 2 years before she was dismissed by the State Services Commission, the authority heard. The commission inquired into alleged misconduct before suspending her without pay a month before her complete dismissal.

The woman went to the High Court to question her dismissal and get her job back. But while the Court asked the commission to re-examine the dismissal, it did not interfere with the woman’s job suspension without pay.

The commission reconsidered its charges against her and dismissed her again.

Almost two years after losing her job in the Public Service, the woman was told by the Court of Appeal that the commission failed to observe “some of the principles of

natural justice” in first deciding to dismiss her. But this did not entitle her to her job back. The woman accumulated about $9OOO in legal expenses in a year, but court costs awarded in her favour did not cover her solicitor’s expenses. She had to pay $5535 out of her own pocket and was not reimbursed. The woman, claiming the amount as tax-deduct-ible, said she spent the money to try to get back her job and salary.