
Publication
An overview of the Commonwealth’s model litigant obligation
Since the early 20th century, Australian courts have emphasised the obligation for the Commonwealth to act as a ‘model litigant’ in court proceedings.
Global | Publication | September 2016
On 14 September 2016, the Brazilian tax authorities published the Normative Instruction (NI) Nr. 1,658 dated 13 September 2016 in the Official Journal of Brazilian Federal Executive. This NI amends Brazilian Tax Haven List that was first published in 2010. The changes adversely impacts the tax characterization of, amongst others, Irish leasing transactions and Austrian holding companies as of 1 October 2016. These changes are likely to impact multinational enterprises (MNEs) that invest in, or do business with Brazil.
The changes are likely to impact multinational enterprises (MNEs) that do business with Brazil as of 1 October 2016, amongst other in the following sectors:
The above is a selection of examples of impacted structures. However, this is not meant to be a complete overview. For more information on reviewing structures and solving potential exposures you can contact us.
The newly published NI 1,658/16 amends both the Blacklist and the Greylist as follows:
The changes are likely to impact multinational enterprises (MNEs) that do business with Brazil as of 1 October 2016, amongst other in the following sectors:
The above is a selection of examples of impacted structures. However, this is not meant to be a complete overview. For more information on reviewing structures and solving potential exposures you can contact us.
Publication
Since the early 20th century, Australian courts have emphasised the obligation for the Commonwealth to act as a ‘model litigant’ in court proceedings.
Publication
The Companies and Limited Liability Partnerships (Annotation) Regulations 2025 and an accompanying Explanatory Memorandum were published on 14 May 2025.
Publication
In a recent decision, Matco Tools Corporation v. Canada (Attorney General), the Federal Court has overturned a Commissioner of Patents (the Commissioner) decision regarding a patent applicant failing to meet the “due care” standard in the context of an unpaid maintenance fee.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025