Summary

In Rambaldi v Commissioner of Taxation [2017] FCA 567 the Federal Court has recently dealt with the vexed issue of a transaction claimed to be an unfair preference but in which a third party provided the subject funds. The key element was not that a third party provided funds, or that the payment discharged the underlying debt but determining who had beneficial interest in the funds until their receipt by the creditor. The case is consistent with earlier authority but for practitioners raises the interesting issue of whether in the instance of third party payments in unfair preference claims a Quistclose trust might arise.