Barton v Westpac Banking Corporation

CATCHWORDS

Trade and

commerce

t r a d e p r a c t i c e s

a c c e p t i n g

payment

for

se rv ices where a t

t une o f accep tance

c o r p o r a t i o n i n t e n d s

t o s u p p l y s e r v i c e s

materially

d i f f e r e n t

f rom

t h o s e

i n r e s p e c t

o f

which payment

accepted

t r a v e l a g e n c y a c c e p t i n g

payment

for

14 day

tour a t time when

could only provide

13 day tou r

- no

e v l d e n c e t h a t s e r v a n t a c c e p t m g

money

knew

t h a t o n l y

day tour could be provided

w h e t h e r d l f f e r e n c e

between 13 day

tour and

14 day tour rne te r ia l

Trade

P rac t i ces Ac t 1974 ,

ss.58

and

85.

Prac t i ce and p rocedure

r e s e r v a t i o n

s ing le Judge

Federe l Cour t

o f

q u e s t i o n for

t h e o p i n l o n

Fu l l Cour t

c o n s i d e r a t i o n

p r l n c i p l e s

upc.1

which

Judge dec ides whether or no t

t o

r e f e r s u c h

q u e s t l o n

Federa l Cour t

o f

A u s t r a l i a Act

1976,

sub-sec .25(6) .

EDWINA ALICE BARTON v. WESTFAC EANKING CC)RPO.UTICN

No. G 222 of 1582

Coram:

Sheppard J.

24 August, l983

and

19 October ,	1983
Sydr,ey

I N THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	No. G 222 of 1982
GENERAL DIVISION

EDWINA

-	ALICE BARTON

P r o s e c u t o r

WESTPAC BP.NKING CORPOMTICN

Defendant

ORDER

JUDGE YAKINC

0,SDER

: Sheppard J.

DATE OF ORDER	: 19 October , 1983
hHERE WADE	: Sydney

THE COURT OilDERS THAT :

The

i n f o r m a t l o n

dlsrnissed.

The

p r o s e c u t o r

p z y

t n e

d e f e n d a n t ' s

c o s t s

o f

t h e

p roceed ings .

' \

IN THE FEDERAL COURT

OF AUSTRALIA

NE';{ SOUTH WALE5 DISTRICT REGISTRY

)

No. G 222 of 1982

DIVISION

GENERAL

Trade Practlces

Act 1974

EDWINk ALICE BARTON

Prosecutor

WESTPAC BANKING CORTORAYIGN

Defendant

CORAM: -

SHEPPARD J.

REASONS FOR JUEMEPIT

On 24 August last I published reasons for my con-

clusion thar the lnformation

In this matter should be

dlsmissed.

I ald not give effect to my concluslon

because senlor counsel

for the prosecutor had asked

me,

if that should be ny n e w , not tc enter Judgment but 50

state a case

or reserve a questlon

0:- questlons for con-

sideratlon by a Full Court pursuant to sub-sec.25(6)

the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976.

Tne reason for

the recuest was that the prosecutor has no rlght

of appeal

agelnst the dlsmlssal

of the lnformatlon, and thus no

ability, unless

I act pursuant to sub-sec.25(6), to test

my vlews as to the meanlng of s.50 of the Trade Pracnces

Act 1974 in the context of thls case;

see Thompson v.

blasterrouch TV Servlces Pty. Llmlted

(1978) 19 A.L.2. 547

October

l a s t

a rgumen t took p l ace on the ques t ion

o f

whether

shou ld ac t pu r suan t

t o sub - sec .25 (6 ) o f

t h e

C o u r t ' s

Act.

S e n i o r

c o u n s e l

f o r

t h e

p r o s e c u t o r

d l d n o t ask

t h a t I

s t a t e a

c a s e ;

r a t h e r h e

s o u g h t

t h e reservation

o f

t h r e e

q u e s t i o n s .

U l t l m a t s l y

was

agreed be tween counse l

rha t

were

t o r e s e r v e

q u e s t i o n ,	It would	be	s u f f l c i e n t i f	It were	stated. a5
fo l lows:

"On

t h e f a c t s

as found by me

was I I n l a w

bound

t o

f m d

t h a t t h e o f f e n c e a l l e g e d u n d e r

s e c t i o n 58 of

the Trade

Practices Act

had

been

proved

SubJec

to any poss ib le defence

u n d e r s e c t i o n

85."

Having t h e p r o p e r c o u r s e

r e f l e c t e d o n t h e

matter

h s v e d e c l d e d t h a t

1 s n o t t o r e s e r v e

eny

q u e s t i o n

f o r

F u l l Cour t ,

but

t o dlsmiss

t h e

i n f o r m a t i o n .

gu lde

t o

t'ne

proper cons t rucr ion of

sub-sec .25(6)

provided ,

i n

op in lon , by the dec i s lon o f rhe

E l g h

Court

i n

Point v . Federal Commissioner

T a x a m (1970)

A.T.R.119.

There

the Cour t

W E S

a s k e d t o r e c o n s i d e r

i t s

a e c l s l o n

Watson v.

Fedsrzl Comnissloner

o f Taxarlor.

(1953) 87

C.L.R.

353

i n whlch

,lt h a d b e e 3 h e l d t h a t

t h e d e c l s l o n o f

~ u s t i c e o f t h e i h g h C o u r t

upon

sn appea l f rom

d e c l s l o n

Board

Reviev$ v tas , ln

the

te rms of sub-sec .136(3) (2~

i t rhen

was)

the

Income

Tax

Assessncnt

Act

19j6, f n a l

2 .

and conclusive and that no appeal therefrom could

be brought to the Full E g h Court.

In Point's case

the Court unanimously refused	to disturb 'datson's
case.

The taxpayer had falled before a Justlce

of the

Hlgh Court. As

an alternative to seekmg to +peal

from hls declslon, he sought from the

justice the

statement of a case pursuant o s.198 of the Income Tax

Assessment Act 1936-1966.

Sub-section (1) thereof

provlded thet the Court mlght,

if it thought fit, state

a case in wrlting for the opinlon of the

Hlgh Court

upon any questlon

of law arlslng on the appeal. The

court referred to was either the

khgh Court (as con-

stltuted by a single Justice)

or the Susreme Court

of a

State simllarly constituted, see

s.157'.

The view was

apparently taken In Polnz's case that a

Justice before

whom a matter came pursuant

o s.196 was also entitled

to state a case pursuant

t o s.198.

In Polnt counsel endeevoured

to argue that an

appeel lay against the unwillingness

of the Justice to

state a case. Barwlck

C . J .

said (p.120):

"One other ratter ougnt

co be mencloned. 11

was argued that an ap-,eal could be brought

against the unwlllingness of the justlce

to ste-ce

a case for the oplnlon of the Full Court.

It was

.. --

1 .

"said that the

Justlce had refused 8n

application.

But, in truth, there could

be no appllcatlon in the proper use

that term. He made no order. The appellant

had no rlght to have a case stated, nor hsd

the Justice any duty under the statute to

so.

The statute affords, in

r~y

opinion, tne

himself of It, of bemg advlsed by a Full

Justlce an opportunity, If he deslres to avail appeal which he 1 s hearlng.

In my opinlon, no appeal

agamst his lack of

any desire to seek such assistance can

be brought.

Therefore, quite apart from the declslon

Watson's case (supra), In my oplnion an appeal

based on the fact that the

Justice did not wlsh

to state a case would

be incompetent."

The judgment of Barwick C.J. was agreed in by the other

members of the Court.

The words of the then existing

s.196 of the Income

Tax Assessment Act are not coucned

m quite the same

language as sub-sec.25(6) of this Court's Act.

particular the words, "if

It thinks fit" do not appear

therein. But the sectlon

1 s expressed so as to glve

the Court constltutea

by a single Judge a wlde dlscretlon

as to whether to state

a c2se o r reserve any questlon.

In my opinion the dlffereme in the wordlng of r;ne two provlslons is not materlal.

The analogy of

s.198 of the Income Tax Assessmenz

Act seems to me to be more apt thar,

does that relied

upon

s e n o r

c o u n s e l

f o r

t h e

p r o s e c u t o r .

urged upon

t h e proposition tha t I should follow

t h e p r a c t i c e l a l d

down

t i e New

South Nales Court

Criminal

Appeal

I n r e l a t i o n

t o

the s ta temer, t of

cases by cha i rmen of Guar te r Sess lons

(now

t h e

D i s t r i c t

C o u r t ) .

S e c t i o n

the

Crlminal

Appeal

Act

1912 (N.S.W.)

p r o v i d e d t h a t

Court of

Q u a r t e r

S e s s l o n s

(now

the Dl s t r l c t Cour t ) mlgh t submi t any

ques t lon o f

law

a r i s ing on any appea l con ing be fo re

i t

t o t h e

C o u r t

o f Cr lmlna l Appeal and

tha t

such

sub-

m i s s i o n s h o u l d b e d e a l t w l t h

were an appeel

t o

t h e

C o u r t

o f

Crlminal

Appeal

under

the Act.

I n

ex Dar te McGavin;

r e Berne (1945) 46 S.R.(K.S.W.)

i t was

h e l d t h a t

i t was

the dury of

chairman of

Q u a r t e r S e s s l o n s

t o s u b m i t

t o

the

Court of Crlmlnal

Appeal any quest lon of

law

w h i c h e i t h e r p e r t y t o

the

appeal

rnlght

ra lse

and

ask t o be so submlzted.

T h e r e a r e

many

polnts of d1st lnct :on between

the

s i t u a t i o n w h l c h t h e c o u r t i n

NcGavln' S

case had to con-

s i d e r

a n d

t h e

p r e s e n t

o r e .

S e c t l o n

xhe

C r i m m a l

Appeal Act

1 s

i n a

s t a t u t e mak lng p rov l s lon fo r appea l s

I n

w h a t ,

f o r

the

n a m

p a r t ,

a r e

c r l r n l n a l

m z t t e r s .

The

C o u r t

f o u n d o b l l g e d

t o s t a t e

c a s e

a n l n f e r l o r

court whose declslons are traditlonally

subJect to

review by the Court

of Crimlnal Appeal.

Sub-section 25(6) is a general provlsion relating

to all matters which are before a single

Judge of the

Court.

The maJorlty of zhese wlll be clvil and not

crminal.

Appeals will therefore lie by elt'ner party

in most cases.

It will only be lf the Judge considers

that it 1 s convenlent to refer a questlon, perhaps

because it raises unusual dlfficulties

or perhaps because

there are conflictlng declslons

- the llst 1s not exhaust-

lve - that a Judge will normally accede

to an applicztlon.

Sometlmes he wlll act of hls own motlon and not at the

behest of the parties.

hrthermore, if the request for

the reservatlon of a questlon 1s by the partles, or one

of them, the Judge will have an obligation to declde

whether the questlon

1 s proper to be referred to a Full

Court.

In a number of cases I nave known t he Judge has

considered lt 1napproprlar;e to refer

2 questlon an5

nas

thought It preferable to declde the case hlrnself leavmg

It TO the appellate processes

t o correct any

e r r o r

that

has been made; cf. Part 12 Rule 2 of tne Zules of the

Supreme Court of Kew South Xales

Earton v. Bermar? (1980)

1 N.S.W.L.R.

63 at pp.67 and 77. These varlous consider-

ations estzbllsh that under sub-sec.25(5)	of tne Court's
Act the Judge has a wiae discretlon.

6 .

I n

t h e p r e s e n t c a s e

have t aken ln to accoun t

t he obv ious conce rn winch the Trade P rac t i ces

Commission has

a s t o t h e p r o p e r c o n s t r u c t i o n

s.58 o f the Trade

P rac t i ces

Ac t .

have

a l so

bo rne

In mlnd

t h a t a

judge nas power

reserve

a q u e s t i o n ,

no twi ths t and lng

tha t he has conc luded

t h a t

inform-

a t l o n

s n o u l d

d l smssed ;

Hender

son

P ionee r

Homes

P t y .

L m i t e d

(1979)

142 C.L.R.

294.

But

h a v e

a l s o

taken

i r . to account

flrm

conclus lon

rhex

the

d e f e n d m t

e n t i t l e d

t o

acqu i t t ed .

ca se

has

involved a

l e n g t h y h e e r m g

and

t h e b r i n g n g

h l t n e s s e s f r o m

overseas .

one

major

polnt

have

found

ega lns t

de fendan t ,

t ha t

i s o n

t h e

q u e s t l o n

of rnateriallty.

nave not found

i t

n e c e s s a r y

d e a l w l t h

I t s

defence

based

s.85

o f

t he

rade

P r2c t i ces

Ac t .

r e s e r v e

ques t lon and

the p rosecu to r

i s

s u c c e s s f u l ,

t h e m a t t e r

w i l l h a v e t o

come

back

s o t h a t

t f ie defence under

s.S5

may

d e a l t n t h .

l t 1 s s u c c e s s f u l ,

t h e

prosecLtor

w i l l aga ln

wl thout

r l g h t of

a-,peal.

1 s n o t ,

l t

1s n o t u n l i k e l y t h e t t h e d e f e n d a n t

bill

wlsh

t o 21;peal

boxh cn the ques t lon

o f

m a t e r i a l i t y

t h e q L e s t i c n

o f

t h e

s.85 defence .

Thus

t h e r e s e r v a c l o n

t h e q u e s t l o n

may7

vdell

l e a d

7 .

t o

s u c c e s s i o n o f f u r t h e r h e a r i n g s w i t h w h l c h ,

i n

t h e l i g h t o f

c o n c l u s i o n t h a t

i t

e n t i t l e d now

t o

acqul

ted

the

defendant

should

nor

burdened

For

a l l

t h e s e r e a s o n s

h a v e d e c i d e d n o t t o r e s e r v e

a n y q u e s t i o n f o r	a	F u l l C o u r t b u t t o p r o c e e d t o d i s r n l s s
t h e m f o r m a t l o n .

Before

conclude

s h o u l d s a y

t h a t

It 1s under-

s t a n d l b l e t n a t

p u b l l c z u t h o r i t y b l t h

the

r r s p o n s l b i l l t y

o f

t h e T r a d e P r a c t l c e s

Commission

should wish

t o

be ab le

t o

t es t

dec is ions wnich

i t

r e g a r d s a s a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t i n g

t h e

a d m i n l s t r a t l o n

o f

t h e

T r a d e

P r a c t i c e s

Act.

S h o r t

o f

p r o v i d i n g f o r a n a p p e a l p r o p e r

the Commlsslon,

tne

on ly way

overcoming

the problem

i s to adop t

t h s cGurse

t aken

i n

some

o f t h e S t a t e s

a l l o w m g t h e q u e s t l o n

t o

c o u r t

o f

appea l bu t no r

s o

a s t o a f f e c t a n a c q u i t t a l

a t flrst

i n s t a n c e ;

c f .

s.5A

o f

t ne

Crlmlnal SpDeel

Act

1912

(N.S.W.).

s u c h

p r o v l s l o n

is In f o r c e i n t h e Commonwealth

f l e l d and

I t would

seen,

however

desirable It may

be t h a t

t h e r e s h o u l d b e ,

t h a t

t h e r e

may

k,e

d i f f l c u l t i e s I n e n a c t m g

one;

c f .

S a f f r o n v.

The

Cueen

(1953) E8 C.L.R.

523.

I n

t h e

r e s u l t

t h e

m f o r r n a t l o n

is 2 l m l s s e d .

o r d e r

t n e p r o s e c u t o r	TO	p a y t h e 2 e f e n d a c t ' s c o s t s o f	t h e p r o s e c -
u t l o n .

ED'dINA H L I C ~

9ARTCK

P rosecu to r

'KSSTPAC E+XKING CGRFGRATION

Defendant

Thls

i s a

p r o s e c u t l m m s c l t u t e 5

r h e

p r o s e c u t o r

f o r

a l l e g e d b r e a c h

t h e d e f e n d a n t

s.58

t h e T r a d e P r z c n c e s

Act

1974

("r;he .ict").

S e c t l o n

5 8

f o l l o w s :

c o r p o r e n o n s l e l l . n o t , I n w e d e

o r

commerce,

accept payment

o r o t h e r c o n s l d e r a t l o n

f o r

goods

o r

s e r v l c e s w h e r e a t

t h e

tune

o f

t he accep tance

1 ~ ;

m t e n d s

( a )

no t

supp ly

t he

goods

o r s e r v l c e s ;

o r

( b )

t o

s u p p l y

goods

o r s e r v l c e s

m a t e r l a l l y

d l f f e r e n t fro?

t h e gcods

o r s e r v l c e s

i n

r e s p e c t o f rr.hlch

m e payment

o r otner

c o n s i d e r a t l o n

accepted ."

The ae fenden t 1 s E

bznk lcg

cc rpora t lon .

a d ~ u n c t

t o ~ t s

b e r l l n g c u s l z e s s

I t

c s n a u c x

12rge

t r a v e l

b u s i n e s s .

P a r t

o f

t x s 'zuslness

Involves

I n w h 3 l e s a l l n g

t o u r s , n o s t l y o v x s e a s

coclrs,

t o

t r a v e l a g e n t s

wno

r e t e l l z n ~

t o u r s

t h e l r

customers .

I n 1981-62 o n e s e r l e s

o f

t o u r s w h c h

was

a v e l l z b l e

was k n o w as m e "Discovery"

ser les .

These

were

t o u r s t o v e r l o u s p l a c e s

Chma end o the r

p l a c e s

~n h h a t

k n c w

2 s

t h e

C r l e n t .

Grle

such

t o u r W E S known E S

"Discovery 5 o l l a a y 526".

I t :vas

i n c l u d e d i n

brochure cor.celnlng

a number of

"Dlscovery"

tours .

The

l t l n e r a r y

h a s

t o

Hong ;<or.&,

Penang,

Kuala

Lxnpur, Kuentan

and

Smgapore.

I t

was

s a d t o s e

a tour wnich

woulc, exxend f o r 16 s a y s

and

14 n l g h t s .

I t

lnvc lvec

depa r tu re

e SacTardzy,

t n a t be l ry

t k e

f i r s t Gay

o f

L!-;?

t o u r ,

a x i r e t u r c o n

Sunday

lnornlng,

t n e S u c d a y b e m E t n e s l x t e e n t h

dzy.

p e r s o n c a h r g

th;s

t 3 w would

e w ~ y c n 15 x g h t s

b u t t h e f l f t e n n t h

would

s p e n t

ove rn lgh t

c rave1 from Singapore

t o

A u s t r a l i a .

tr.ls

k a s l s

i t

was

a ? p a r e n t l y n o t l n c l u d e c a s o n e

o f

t n e

i 4 n l g h t s .

I n c l r c u m s t e n c e s

f u l i y t o

'ce

c e s c r l b e d

Xrs.

Spz i r s

In Augus t

1561,

throush

r r a v e l a g e r i t ,

Cen tu ry P ieza Treve l ,

o rce rec~

t5e t o c - t o d e p z r r c c

cc>

S a t u r c a y ,

6 Fezrue ry ,

l - c i ,

E I ? ~ t o

r e t u r r .

3 2

2 .

Sunday, 20 February , 1962.

She

paid

for the

t o u r or: or about 5 Decexber, 1451.

I n

t h e e v e n t s w n l c n t r z r s p l r e d s h e

W E S

booked

t o t r a v e l

home from Singapore, n o t on The Saturday

evening

but

the Fr iday evenlng

February ,

1982.

She

was

t h u s a w a y , n o t f o r

days

and

14 n l g h t s b u t

f o r 15 days

and

13 n l g h t s .

Her

s t a y

l n

S m g a p o r e

was

r e d u c e d f r o n t h r e e d a y s

t o

two.

The

way

t h e c a s e

1 s p u t

a g a n s t

t he de fendan t

t n a t w l t h l n t h e

rneenlng

s.58

I t , a

c o r p o r a t l o n ,

i n t r a d e

o r

commerce

accep ted paymen t fo r s e rv i ces ,

n a n e l y t h e when I t intended to

526

t o u r o r a e r e d

Nrs.

S p e l r s ,

r-t a

t m e

supplq’

s e r v l c e r n a t e r i E l l y

different

f r o m t n e s e r v i c e I n r e s p e c r : o f

kh;ch

h e r

9ayment

was

a c c e s t e d .

The

m a t e r l a 1

d i f f e r e n c e

s a l d

t o be

i n t h e r e d u c t l o n

t h e t l n e

t h e

t o u r

t o

whlch There is no

h a v e r e f e r r e d .

I s s u e t ha t the de fendan t

1s a

co r -

p o r a t i o n n o r t h a t t h e t r a n s a c t l o n

was

e n z e r e d m t o

i n

t r a d e

o r commerce.

Nor 1s t h e r e

a c y

q u e s t l o n

t h a t

t h e d e f e n d a n t

d:d

accep t paymen t

fo r

t he

tou r

tha t

Mrs.

S p e l r s t r e v e l l e d n o n e

February ,

1982,

r a t h e r

t k a ? 20

F e k u a r y ,

1962.

But	In t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s s u b n l s s i c n :

( 2 )

Tke

I n f o r n a n t h2s

r o t e s t a b l l s n e a

c h a t

t h e

aefendt int , a t cne tine of eke acceccence o f

Mrs. S p e i r s ' nor.ey,

lntended

sursply

s e r v i c e ,

i . e .

t o u r ,

f r a t e r i a l l y d l f f e r e n t

f r o 3

t h a t

I n

respec

lch

the peynent

was

a c c e p t e d ;

( 5 )

t h a t h a s e s t e b l l s h e d

s u m i s s l - n

r e J e c t e d ,

t h e

d e f e n 6 a r . t

0r.e

o r more

%.le d e f e r c e s

provldea f o r

s.E5

t h e .LCT.

I t

s h o u l d 3 e n o t i c e d t h a t

t h e r e a r e

two

a s p e c t s

o f

( a ) .

T n e f x s t 1s tne

ques t lon

wnetker

t o u r

cu t

s h o r t by

one

d a : ~ was

materially

d i f f e r e n t from

t n e t o u r a c v e r c l s e d

i n

t h e b r o c h u r e a n i

f o r

:v:?lcn

Mrs. S p e l r s cela hey mouey.

Tne second

Acectlcn

whether ,

i f

rh2 t

s o ,

m e

e v l d e n c e

e s t e b l l s n e s

; n a t

a t t n e

tlme of

ch?

a c c e p t a c e o f

t n e pay?ent

'ne

defendent

ln tended

p r s v l d e t h e s b r t e n e d t o u r .

The

r e s o l u t i o n o f

t h e s e s u b r n l s s l o n s n e c e s s l t a t e s

d e $ a l l e i

r e v l e w

tne

ev lde rce .

A s

rner,t&oned, t n e

b r o c h u r e a d v e r t l s e c

che

+cur

one m l c h vdould

r e t u r n $0 A c s c r a l i a on S.unday n3rn-

Lng,

t h e

: o u r l s t s

navlng 1e:t

3xg27;are c h ~

prev lous

4 .

evenlng.

The a l r l l n e whlch wes

t o f l y t:!e

l a s t

l e g o f

t h e

t o u r

was kaCtes Llmltea.

The e a r l l e r

l e g s w e r e f l o w n e l t h e r

Ca thay Pec l f l c

IvIelayslan

Ai r l lne

Sys t ems .

A t ell m e t e r i a l times

,encas

hed

f l l g h t ,

LF2

( s o m e t l m e s

r e f e r r e d

t o

I n

t h e e v i d e n c e

iFG802)

w h c h t r a v e l l e d d a l l y f r o m S l n g a p o r e

t o

Sydney

2nd

P!elbourne.

The

f l l g h t

o r l g l n a t e d

I n

Londcn

en5 s e t down

acd

?lcked

L!:

p a s s e n c e r s z t

Slngapore

Its

way

t o A u s t r a l l a . U a n t a s a l s o o p e r a t e d

anot'ner

f l l g h t , ,,F56

( o t h e r w l s e ,F06?6)

whlch was

desc r ibed as a

t e r m l n e t o r flight.

I t Trave l l ed a s

GF95 from

Sydcey

and

Pielbohrne

-0

Singapore and

t t ien

r e t u r n e d

t o

Sydcey

end

Ib!eicourne a s ,dFFi6.

I t

ope ra t ed

on Sarurdey evenlngs f rom S~ngepore anc

' U Z S

t h e f l l ; h t

l n t e n d e d

those

wno

c o c s t r u c t e d t n e

tour

t o c a r r y t h e p a s s a n g e r s

back

t o

Sydney

o r

Melbourne.

For c lear Qantas Li rn l ted dec lded

reasons

whlch

tne evldence does not

nake

in &ne

1581

to cnange

the day upon whrch

l c wouid

o p e r e t e

,*F55

2nd

LF96

from

S a t u r d a y

t o

T r l c a y .

Tazc leTt ,,T2

a s t!i< m l y ,Z?tas

f l l g h c reT!xxng

from

S l n g e g o r ?

t c

S l < ~ e ; - ??d

h e ~ b o ~ r c e .

Since

It was

fll;tit

whlck had or lg lne ted In

London

znere vdas

nor;

c e m a l n ' y

t h a t 2 a s s e n g e r s

;ne

sub-

J e c t

t o u r s a n d o n o t h e r

t o u r s c o u l d b e f o m d s e a t s

t h e aircraft.

I n

J u n e

1981 Clantas L l m t e d

Informed

Catnay

Paclflc

and

:he

defendant of the change.

I t

s a i d t h a t p a s s e 5 g e r - s f r o v t o u r

526

would nave

l e a v e o n t h e F r l d a y r a t h e r

t h a n t h e S a t u r d a y .

S z r o n g r e p r e s e n t a t l c n s t o L a n t a s i m l t e d w e r e

nede

c o t k

Czthay PEclfLc 2nd

ti le

defendant

cne

e d t r a v e l on f l l g n t dF2

t h a t

u a n t a s

would e l r ;her

a l lok

the

passengers

t h e C-etLirday o r woul:!

r e s t o r e

I ts

t e r m m a t o r

s e r v i c e

t o S e t u r d a y .

One

o f

t n e d e f e n d a n t ' s

t o u r d e p a r t m e n t s

was

I t s

Tour

dholesale

Oepartment .

T h ~ s

depertment was 'croken

up i n t o and sales.

t h r e e

s e c t l o n s ,

n s m e l y ,

m e r k e t l n g ,

o p e r a t l o n s

A Mr.

S a l l y was,

a t

t h e

r e l e v a n t

t i m e ,

manager

the marke t ing sec t lon ana

Mr.

iloodcock

t n e

manager of

t h e

o p e r a t l o n s

e c t l o n .

The

? r l n c l p a l

r e p r e s e n t a t l o n s t o

'Clantas

Llmited

made

bena l f

o f

the defendant t o a Mr.

were

made

by Mr.

E a l l y .

xade

them

P l a l s t e r who,

a t t h e

r e l e v e n z

t l m e ,

was

r?ar ; lonal

acc3ur

xanager

tscned

,entes '

Sydrey

ofr ' lce .	Both ;\'IT. 2 ~ 1 1 ~	ar.2 IIr. 2:?:stter	geve	svldence
6 .

of the l r r e c o l l e c n o n s o f

d1scuss ;ons . t n e c o n v e r s a t l o n s h a v e

Uncers tencac ly

the i r

dlmmed.

Ne l tne r

now

h o l d s

zhe p o s l t l o n h e

ned l n 1581.

Mr.

B a l l y

1 s no

l onge r

t he

de fenden t .

.Fie

now

l i v e s

lr? C a l l f o r n l a a n d

1 s

the marke t lng

manager

fo r

Amer

icen

t ou r s

company.

M r . P l a s t e r

s t a t l o n e d

I n

S a h r a l n

a n d

Q z n t a s '

s a l e s

manager

f o r t he

lCd

Eas

w l tnes ses

kere

b r o u g n t

t o A u s t r a l i a

especially

f o r

t n e c a s e .

Tnls

i s

a n l n c l c a t l o n

t n e i m p o r t a n c e t h a t

t n e

p a r t l e s a t t a c h

t o It.

Mr.

P l a s t e r s a d t h a t

h i s r e c o l l e c t l o n

was

t h a t a f t e r r e p r e s e n t a t l o n s w e r e

made,

p o t o n l y

t h e d e f e r d e n t

but;

o r k e r

t ou r ope?a to rz

1-S

\ . 'el l ,

uaE tas ag reed

to accep t pas senge r s

t h e

re1evar . t

Saturday

evenlnss ,

Z l r s t l y

at11 31

Decenber,

1981,

a n d

t h e n

u n t l l

31 JaFuary ,

1982.

Mr.

P l a l s t e r

remembered

r e p r e s e r t e t l o n s b e i n g n e d e t c

W-.

B e l l y a n d a l s o

l e t t e r k h r c h

Mr.

E e i l y

hzd wr l t t en .

thcught

t h a t

The

p r m c i p a l p r o b l e m

wes

n o t

the

change

from

Saturcay

10 Fr lday bu t

che f e c t That

,F56 dculd	no	longer	o-,eraTe	ts TNelbourne;	i t was
..

o- ,e rz te

Sydne:;

on?)-.

PT. slelszer's r e c o l i e c t l c n

WES t h a t p o s s i b l y I n t h e

t h e n e e o t l a t i o n s w e n t

June end

earl:;

p e r t o f J u l y

1981.

The t h e f l r s t depa r tu re on

programme

f o r t o u r

526

extended

from

Apr i l ,

1981, TO

t h e

l a s t

depa r tu re

March,

1982.

The

f l r s t

r e t u r n was

on 2 Fay,

1981 a c d t n e l a s t o n

A~rl l ,

1 9 8 2 .

T h e r e

o n l y

f l v e

n e n r n s

z f t e r

December,

1381, a n c o n l y

t h r e e a f t e r

31 Janue ry ,

1982.

Accordmg

Mr.

F l a i s t e r

t h e

-,roblem was

e n t i r e l y o v e r c o m e e x c e p t a s

t o

t h e

l e s t

t h r e e

tours

whlch

were

due

to re turn

2 C

February ,

23 :/larch acd 10 G.7r -11 ,

1982.

Pi?.

F l a l s t e r s a d

t h a t

t h e d e f e n d e n t d l d r e c u e s t

t h a t p a s s e n & e r s

allo?.red t o t r s v e l

on ;F2

t h e Sa turdey up

t o t h e

end o f the

progranme

on 1C April,

1982.

5 u t

h e

s a l d t n a t

was

n o t p o s s i b l e

t o a l l o w

t h l s

seyond

January,

1982.

though t

ne re

mgh

nave

been

some

discussion

akout

welt

h s t l n g t h e p a s s e n g e r s

the

r e t u r n s t o t a k e p l a c e a f t e r

Janua ry ,

1982,

o u t

h i s

r e c o l l e c t l o n

was

vague.

s t r e s s e d

t h a t

che ?roblem C l scovs rq

c l d

not on ly concer r .

t i l e defendant ' s

t cu r s

' cu t

t he

tou r s

o t h e r o p e r a t o r s

we l l .

The

TaxiTum

number

o f

sookings o n :?.;

OL ::le

S .

d e f e n d a n t ' s

526

t o u r s

was

25.

O t h e r

c p e r a t o r s

r e q u l r e d

Tany

s e a t s t h a n t n l s ,

hltn

t h e

r e s u l t t h e t t n e p r o b l e m

was

oEe

o f f l n d l n g p e r w o s

1OC s e a t s on bu t p l ck ing up passenge r s on

a n a i r c r e f t n o t o r i g l n a t l n g

S ~ n g a ? o r e

Its

way

through from

London

t o A u s t r a h a .

The

maxlmum

number

s e a t s

on an a i r c r a f t wzs

401.

Mr.

P l a l s t e r ' s r e c c l l e c u o n

was

t n a t his

d l s -

c u s s l o n s

; n t h

Kr.

B a l l y came

t o en end c e r t a n l y by

August.

l e f t hls

tnen p o s l t l o n i n Noverber

1281

and has those whlch I

n o r e c o l l e c t l b n

any dlscusslons beyond

h a v e

d e s c r l b e l .

O f vdait

l l s t x g he

sald chat

foun-l

h a r e

t o

r e m e q b e r " m y s p e c l f l c s " .

He added, "It m y heve

be+n

discussed

2s a

g e n e r a l l t y .

There

1 . e ~ a

possib1l;:y

0,"

h21c

l l s t ; r , g , bu t

c e r -

c a l n l y

vmuJd

nave d l scouragec cha t so r t c f a?p roacn .

C e r t a m l y , a s f a r a s

zwar-e,

thkre wes

a t t empt

t o walt 1lst.I'

s a l d he hed

surhor l ty

t o

re-

l o c a t e p a s s e n g e r s

from

f l l g h t 26

t o f h & t

beyond

31 J a n u s r y ,

L982.

s a l d

t h a t

n e

h e l d

o k t

hope

t h a t

t h a t c c u l c b e S a n e .

Accordx ,c

E r .

E ? l l y , n e

maae

re;resentat:cns

t o a i r .

l i z l s t e r a a u t

<he ;roble:

07 mazy

'XCSSL'.T',S

over a S e r l c c 9:

moctcs.

Iz :%'as h15 k a t l t :c

s p e w

t o Mr.

P l e i s t e r a h o s t s n

d s ~ l y

bzsls .

rne

l a p r e s s l o n

have

f r o n n l s

ev lcecce

1 s

t h a t c n

most

days

m e problem was mentFonea.

Ye cla

n o t ,

o f

cour se ,

on ly

speek

Mr. F l a l s t e r a b o u t

t n l s

problern.

They

had

nany

matters

discuss,

bur;

Mr.

B a l y ' s r e c o l l e c t l o n

i s t h e t

t n l s ?robiem

was r a i s e d meny tlmes.

t h l s he s a d , "Ir; has

an ongo lng ;u*hlch hould Rot

p ropos l t l on

( S I C ) .

I t :tes

somethmg

be	resolved concreceiy on any glver ,

day.

I t h a s a r o l i m g

p r o p o s l n o n

w k c h

nad

t o

'ce

lntrodLced

ove r E

p e r l c a o f

Tine!'.

a l s o s z l d ,

"He

(1Nr .F la s t e r )

adv lzed

;ne

t n a t w ? ? y e n c e a v o c r

wculd

be made

to accormodate

our

t o u r p e s s e n g e r s

t h e

W 2 flight

f o r t he cu ra t lo r !

t h e p r o g r s m e

and

xoula

be ,

c o u r s e ,

s u b J e c t

t o s p e c e b e x g a v a l l -

e b l e " .

Mr.

6 a l l y sal? r ;hat

referencz

has

nede

t o 31 g lven of 31 December,

J a n u a r y o u t h e r e c a l l e d

thar;

t h e r e

was

d a t e

"but

d l d n o t a b l d e

l t

because I sa ld

the prcgranme

had

beer!

brochures x d

was

f ac r . due

to ope ra t e

th rougk

tne end

Marcn".

K r .

Ba l l ey E ~ S O

sa ld t h e t ne unders tooc

r.he

problem

was

r e s o l v e d

' l a d

that E-S en ocgclr,g

t n x g I t W E S

l n	f ac t %lng r e sc l . J ed" .

S e x o r c s u n s e i f o r m e

defe!-:da?t

? E t

t h e

subs t ance

Kr.

E a l l y ' s e v l e e n c e

t o

Yr.

P l z l s t e r

In cross-exammat ion .

Mr.

P l a l s t e r

e r r a l n e d

r'lrm

l n h i s r e c c l l e c t l o n t h a t

t h e

c r a n s f e r t o

:F2

from

GF96

was

flrm

e v e n t u a l l y t o

t n e end of

Janbary

iS82.

Notning

was

d o n e I n r e s p e c t

t h e l a t e r r e t m r s .

He sa ld That once passengers could

the

directive

was

I s s u e d t t a t

zhe

no's te accommodated on f l i g h t 96

a f t e r t h e

end of

Jacuary

It ceased

to be E proble-n.

I n r;he

words

he used ,

" the t

was

t h e

end

o f

-me m a t t e r " .

The common ground

Setv,een

t h e

two

w l t n e c s e s

taat

a l s c u s s ~ o n s b e t w e e n t n e n

went

o n nc

k t e r than

SeTtember 1981;

t h e

p r o b e b l l l t l e s

a r e

t h a t

t h e y

c e a s e d

e a r l l e r

t k n

t h a t

inorith.

There was

pro5lerr.

a b o ~ t

r e t u r n s up

t c t h e ent

Deceiiber

1981.

I n :ne

mmas

o f

t h e

two

w i t n e s s e s

t h e r e

was no ?rr,kiem

e i t t e r

a b o u t

r e t u r n s

January 1982.

The

e s s e n t l a l

d i f f e r -

ence

between

them

1s c h a t ?h-.

P l a l s t e r ' s r e c o l l e c t l o n

t n a t t h e r e

was

F o s s l b l l l t y of

d o n g a n y t h l n g

a b o u t

t h e

t h r e e r e t u r n s

t o

t a k e p l a c e s f t e r

t h e e n d

j a c u a r y

1932.

I n Xr.

S a l l y ' s

r e c o i l e c t l o n

t n c - r e

was

o n g o n g a t t e m p t , a i t n o - s n

f a r a s

..vas

11.

per sona l ly conce rned

I t

czme

to an end

Ser,te-?ber

LSSl, t3 accom?oc2;@ passenze r s on [;F2

or, Sa tu rday

respecr ;

t n e r e r x % a f t e r

31 J a n u a r y ,

1952.

Llgh t

1 s

sned on what

re-arrangements were

lr.

f a c t made

t h e e v l d e n c e

two

o tner pg l tnesses and

documents

kepr;

them.

The

two witnesses a r e P?r.s.

Cree and Cree 1 s an

Mrs.

C r o u c h e r ,

f c m e r l y

Dillss 3hlpway.

Mrs.

empl3yee

of Cathay

Pac l f lc .

She

xzd a

schedule which was 2 connputer

prinr;

out wnlck

listed

t n e

d e t a l l

e a c h

t h e

t o u r s

m r,he programme.

The

2rmt

o u t showed

the day

o f

depsr t l ; re

2nd

tne dey of

r e t u r n .

The 7urpose of

I t M ~ S

t o

e n a b l e

iws.

C r e e

t o

n a k e r e s e r v z t l o n s C a t h a y I z c l l l c I t s e l f , o n e

a l r l : r ec ,

t?vo

r e s e r v a t l o n s

XElayslan

.-.irllnes

Systems

ard t h e Croucher, who xas

f o u r t h

f a r t h e

r e t u r n

111~h;

,,anteS.

I b l r s .

enployed

m e d e f e r d s n t , h a i

coun te rpa r t

o f

this dscumenr;.

Born Xrs. C r e e

a r d

Mrs.

Croucher

made

n o t a n o n s on

t h e i r c o p l e s

a s

e v e n t s

t r a n s -

p l r e d .

Mrs.

CrDucher 's

r .o tar ; lons

were

respect

tne

Q a n t a s r e t u r n f l l g h t s , m e o n l y m e s t n a t c o n c e r n e d

her.

Her docurnext 1s m x h c l e a r e r

t h a n

iblrs.

C r e e l s .

That

1s EO

c r l t l c l s m

o f

Xrs.

Cree.

h l y a Fho tos tE t

12.

copy

o f

h e r

notations

c s u l d

f o m d a r c t h e y

nave

su f f e red

lr. t h e

z r c c e s s .

AS b e s t

c m

read

t'nem

they Ere

conformity .trlzh Xrs.

Crouche r ' s

no ta t lons wn lch

z r o s o s e

t o u s e a s

g u i d e a s t o

wkt happened. I n o r d e r t h a t h e r n o t a t l o h s

may

be expla ined

shou ld nen t lon

znzt

Xrs.

C r e e l s chr l s t lan name

1s Inez 21id h e r

l n l t l z l s

I.<.

30 th her

c n r l s t l a n

n2me and her

lnltlals zppear ln zhe dccumencat ior

t h e c a s e . From Mrs. Croucher 's

aocument

or-e

c a n s e e

t n e

problem

f l r s t

a r l s l c g I n r e s p e c t

05 e

r e t u r n

schedu led

l eave S lngapc re

on Satu-day,

Zuly,

15231.

The

r e t u r n was

a c t u a l l y maae

' r laay,

2& J d y .

But

I n r e specc c l r e t m n s

t h e r e a f t e r

t o and

lnc lud?ng

Sa ta-day ,

?<ovm.>er, 1981,

t h e

n o t a t l o n s

show

t n a t

211

passenge r s were

t r ans fe r r ed

t o

:F2

and

were

p r e s u m a b l y c a r r l e d o n t h l s f l i g h t

the

s chedu led

Sa tu rday .

Fu r the rmore ,

zhe

no ta t -

ions shoh t ha t

t hese changes were zade

2nd

conflrmed

on e l the r 23 June , 1931, o r 24 June , 1981;

13.

question

of walt i l s t l n g WES Idvoived .

14 November,

1981,

t h e r e was

on ly one

fLr rhe r

r e tu rn beCore

31 December,

1981, r?emely

t h e t due

to r e t u r r , by December, 1961.

f l l g h t l e a v x g S m g a p o r e

or,

Mrs. Crouche r ' s

no te

shows

t h a t

the pessengers were

ciue t o l e a v e

or? uF95, presum-

e t l y on

tile

F r l d a y , but

were

h a l t l l s t e d o r SF2 f o r

t h e

S e t k r d a y .

T h a z

t h e y

I n

f a c t

r e v e l l e d

t h e

SF2

t h e S e t u r d a y

1s conf l rme i ,

so f z r a s I

cen

make

out

f rom

Xrs.

Creels document ,

h e r n o t e t l o n

t h e r e o n .

J u s t

7.vNnen

tne

passengers

were

WELT:

l l s t ed

on CF2 and when the zocKmg

became 3 r n I av unable

t o

sey .

The Cecepbber, 1561, was

f irst

r e t u r n l e z v i n g

Singapore

a f t e r 31

t n a t departing on 9 Janue ry , lC82.

A s I n t h e c a s e o f t h e C r o u c h e r ' s e n t r y

Dece rbs r depa r tu re

Mrs.

sho-u,s

thar;

the pessengers were

booked

f l l g h t :F96

buc

were

w a l t l l s z e c

GF2,

p re sumab ly

fo r

t he

Sa t c rday .

Aga

t hey

a spea r

t o

h a v e

t r a v e l l e d

313

.,F2

OF t ne

3a tu rdey .

i n

r e s p e c t

of zhe next

Januzr:r

aeq-;erture

from LlnFarore o ~ i

Sar;urds;r, 2;

Zzzusry, 2.532, I>lr:. ZJrcucher' S r-cze

shows

Janua ry c ros sed ou t

2nd

J z n u a r y ,

t h a t

1 s

the

F r l d a y ,

s u b s t l t u t e a .

I t

a i s o

snows

t h a t

t h e p a s s e n g e r s w e r e

t o

t r a v e l o n

LF96.

There i s no no-ce made by h e r

t o

s u g g e s t

t ha t

these

passengers were ever

walt

i l s t e a

or,

LF2.

That

t n e q

I n

f a c t

r a v e l l e d

F r l d a y ,

January ,

and

Sa turday ,

23 J m u a r y ,

con-

firmed

o t h e r e v l d e n c e t o x h l c h

s h a l l l a t e r

r e f e r .

Krs.

Cree l s

noza t lon

he r

do -unen t

c o i n c l d e s WiZn

t h a t o f

Mrs.

Croucher ' s .

Tne f o r Sa tu rday , 20 Fe'cruary,

c r l t l c e l d e p a r t u r e

was

the t

schecluled

19S2.

Both Nrs.

Creels

document

and

Mrs. C r o x h e r ' s d0cumer.t

show

t h a t

t n l s r e t u r n f l l g h t

was

csanged

f rom

F e b r u a r y t o

F e b r u a r y a n c

t h a t

t n e

f l l s h t was

t o be

OFg6.

Furthermore, Mrs. C r o u c n e r ' s n o t z t l o n , a l t h o u g h w r i t t e n I n v e r y s m a l l p r l n t , p l a m l y l n d l c a t e s t h a t

the change

was Tade

2& June , 1981, when z number

the o ther changes were

made.

The

r e t u r n d u e t o i e e v e S m g a p o r e

March

nas above 1~ I n

r e d

a b b r e v l E t l o n

" / i / i . 'l

Thls

1s n o t I n

Mrs.

C r o ~ c n e r ' s n e n d u r l t l n g ~

l n c l c z t e s

15.

wait

l l s t .

Uinderneeth

the

ntry

1 s

w r l t t e n

"19"

t n e

2 C

b e m g

s t r u c k

o u t ,

and LF%.

I an:

unable to home on 2ci Karch c r 19 March, bu t

say

. rher ;her

tne

pessengers

t rave l led

the	fac t That

the

symbols

" i i / L "

a r e c r o s s e d o u t

would

sugges t

t h a t

t h e y

m u s t

h i v e

come

back

19 March.

The

f l n a l

r e t u r n was

t h a t

l e a v l n g S i n g a p o r e

April, 1952.

i t has

above

It m e

a b b r e v l i t l o n

1 1 0 p .

The a2brev;atlon

1s n o t

c r o s s e d

o u t .

Underneath

l c a r e

t h e l e t t e r s r c d f l g u r e s

"OF2

I n e z

2 4 / 6 " .

Tne

symbol

s t a n d s

f o r

c o c f l r m e d .

Thus

24 J u n e ,

1981, Krs.

Cree

conflrmea

. ! ~ tn

Mrs.

Crouche r

tha t pas senge r s

l eav lng

Singapore

10 A p r l l ,

iC;52,

vou16

l e a v e on

t h a t day

SLt

or!

:F2

r a t h e r t h m or!

&F%.

The

documentatLon t c whlch

h a v e r e f e r r e d

ls,

t o

degree ,

r t

o d d s w l t h b o t h

t n e r e c o l l e c t l o n

Mr. P l e i s t e r t n e r e c o l l e c t l o n o f

a n d

Mr.

E a l l y .

I t 1s a t odds

wlth

Plr.

P le l sTe r because

5oes

n o t s u g g e s t

t h a t

a l l f l l g h t s c e f o r e

Seceqber ,

19@l,

were conf l r r ed

In June

1981 f o r t h e S a t 7 x d a y

r e t u r n .

The

r e t u n

l e e v l n g

Slngepore on 26 Dececoer,

lSEl, Tust have bee r w d o r a c loud keceuse 3f

',?.e r!?sd

to wait llst the passengers.

More importantly

trle docunentation establishes That tke second

Januery return due

to leave Singapore on 23 Jznuary

did. noT; leave on that day but left

a day esrly on

22 January.

According to the notatlon of both

Nrs. Cree and Mrs. Croucher tnere wes never any questlon of the passengers travelilng otnerwlse than oc the Frlday. It was v,ror?g, tnerefore, to

say that tne passengers were all

confirmed on liF2

on tne Saturday up to the end

o f JEnclary 1982.

The documentatlor, also establishes that or,

2 4 ;me, 1981, Xrs. Cree, throGgh r4r-s. Croucher,

WES able to book +ne

returning tourlsts f o r 10

April, 1982, firmly on GF2 departing 5lngapore o n

t5at day. Thus >l?. Plalster's recoiiectlcc thet

nothmg could ce cone

fcr tne final three returns,

thet 1 s those ccc.;rrlng

after 3i Ganuery, 1582, 1s

wrong. The matter

dld not develop out of later

events.

The return was 5 r d y booked some ten

montns prevlously on 2 4 June, 1931.

The documentatlon 1s at odds with Mr. Bally's recollectlon becaLse ~t does not suggest any

ongong

17.

a t t e m p t s

t o have

the pes senge r s

t r ans fe r r ed

>F2 on t h e

S a t u r d z y .

T t x s

Goes

n o t

e s t e b i l s h

conc lus lve ly

Clet

s t t emprs were no t

o e x g made,

b u t

lt t e n d s

suggest

-chat ,

zf they

were,

taey

were

n o t m e e n n g The documentatlon discloses tha t most of

with

eny success .

the

problem was so lved by 24 June , 198i.

Tne on ly

r e t u n s wnlc:1

were

tr,er!

l e f t i n a

d o u b t f u l s1T;u-

a t i o n w e r e t h o s e l e a v m g S l n g a p o r e

or!

> e c e x e r ,

1981,

9 J a c u e r y , 193,

January,

1Se2,

20 February, r e t u r n s d u e

1982 and

Ferck ,

1982 .

3u t

t ne

l eave S lngapore on 23

Janusry ,

1582,

ar.d 20 February, certainly on 2L June , lSE1, t o coee

;%2,

were bs3kec

f l n l y , t n e l a c E e r

back

o r

t h e

F r lday

2F96.

There

1s s m e eoc:bt z5out t h e

r e t u r n & e

l e a v e Singapore

ii:a-ch,

l9e.2,

b e c a u s e t n e n o t a t l o n

concerning

SF56

penc l l and

t h e l e t t e r s

d / L

whch have been crossec

OUT; l n d l c z t e

that

h e r e was

an a r t empt

to wa i t

l l s t

passer!gers

on QF2 for t h i s

r e t u r n .

AUthougn

the

ev lcence

does

not	enable ne	T;O s ey so :t	1s p o s s l ~ l e ~	k	t h e	z
18.

‘

a t t e r r p t

t o

walt llst tnese

;esser . , -e rs a rose

tecsuse

tne comFhln ts which were nade

r s s p e c t

or‘

t n e

two

7 r e v l o u s t o u r s ,

t h a t

1 s t h o s e

d1ae

t o r e t u r n

23 January

and

2G Tebruary, l982.

. I should

say

bo th

Nrs.

Cree 2nd Mrs. Croucher

t h a t

h e y

i m p r e s s e d

a s

w l t n e s s e s .

They

a r e

b o t h

young

and

In comparacrvely

Junior

p c s l t i o n s I n t r . e i r

r e s p e c t l v e

o r g a n l s a t l o n s .

Euc

they

both

displayed

degree

o f

e f f lc lency acd knowledge about

the

system

wnich

impressed

me.

Mrs. Cree ‘,vas 3 e r t l c u i a r l y con-

cerned about

m s chenge 2nd

she hersel: ,

el thouzh

doubt a t a cornparet lvely junior lelre:,

enaeavoured

t o h a v e r e p r e s e n t a t l o n s	made	w n c h - , r a i d o v e r m m e t z e
problem.

e g a l n s t

t n l s

‘:ackpoL;nd

t n a t Mrs.

S p e l r s

er?d Century

Plaza

Trevel come l n t o

t h e

p l c t u r e .

should ment lon

tha t

It was common ground ketween

counse l

t h e t

Cen tu ry P laza Trave l ec t ed a s an agen t

f o r the defendant

s o t k a t tile

t r e n s a c t l c n was

b e b e e n

the

defendant

and

Krs.

S p e l r s .

neve

no t

u rned

m-nd

That

.ues t lon .

:he

Ilr-;nt

t k e c3nmcn

ground

wnich

there

1 s cetween c s m c e l akour:

The

m a t t e r

n o t f l n a

lt n e c e s s a r y t o

so.

Mrs.

S p e l r s had 2 co7y

t he 'x-ochure.

17 August,

19e1, she

paia

d e p o s l t o f

S50 f o r

t h e t o u r . c o r i f l r m e d ,

18 August,

1981, her

booklng

was

t h e

l e z t e r

t o

he r

from

Century

Flaza

r r a v e l

t ha t

d a t e

saying,

amongs t o the r

t h lngs ,

t h a t a

r e s e r v a t l o n had been

rnaae

for ner

r e s p e c t

of a Holiday 526l

t o u r ,

" S a t u r d a y ,

February ,

'ri.

Tcurs

'E l scove ry

- 16 days/l4 n l g h t s t c

i-long Kong/Fenang/

Kuala Lumpur/Kuantan/3lngapore."

The bookmg was conflrmed by t h e de fecdan t on

20 August, 1981.

P t t he

s ane

xrne a zhange ta cke

itinerary was advlsed.

Thls

resul 'ed

t n e r e

b e l c g

one more m g h t I n

Hsng K o ~ g

and one

l e s s n g h r In

Penang. On 28 Novexber, 1981,

Nothing

turns

t n l s .

t he

d e f e n d a n t

l n v s l c e j

Century

P laza

Trave l

for t h e

t o u r .

The

T o t a l

p r l c e

was 'cc be $1,648.

On 3 December, 1981, Xrs. Suel rs

~ 2 1 6

what was due.

Ei 'hor

on t k r : dzy o r a aey o r

l a t e r Cec tu ry F laza Tra - r e l

accouc t?d

t o

r;he

20.

defendant

for

the

paymerc .

h C 3ecem->er, lSEl,

Cztaey

P a c l f l c l s s u e d t l c k e t s

fcr

e11

l e g s

o f

t h e

t o u r

l n c l u d l n g

t h e

r e t u r n .

The

r e t u r n wes

booked

Fr ldzy ,

S e b r u a r y

o n

Q a n t a s

f l i g h t

96.

The

n c k e t s

were no t

t hen sen t

t o

Cen tu ry P l i za Trave l

t o b e

given

t o Mrs.

S p e l r s ,

a p q e r e n t l y b e c a u s e

t x

d e f e n d a n t h a d t o b e s z K l s f l e d t h a t a t

l e a s t

t e n

persons w o ~ ~ l i

t r e v e l

t a e t o u r

lr. o r d e r t o o b t a l n

t h e b e n e f l t o f t n e l o w e r

a l r

f e r e s

'char;

e r e p a y e b l e

f o r a group cf

Ter. or nore.

The

t l c k e t s , o t n s r a c c u m e c r a t l c r

z r d

i t l c e r a r y

were

sent

to Cenzury FlazE Travel on

?bout

Jenue ry ,

1982.

Accom:enylng

zhem 'des a n

m v o l c e

which

s a d , a n o n g s t o t h e r

t p l n g s ,

IIRecuced

l a n d c s s t

-1

due

f l i , F h t

r e s c h e s a l l n g " .

;ne

lnvolce

Tncl lc i tec

tha t

r e f m d was

payable .

Mlss

G s l l a n ,

eqployee

of Century ? laza Trave l ,

V I E S

har?a lmg the ma t t e r .

She

d l d

n o t u n d e r s t i n d t h e l n v c l c e a n d

rznrr

t h e

d e f e n d a n t

t o

f l n d o u t

what It meant.

She was

advised

the t t n e Slngepore szop over

hzd Seer.

reduced

one

n i g h t f r o m t h r e e pes senze r s -..;ere cice

s i5hts t o r e t c r cn F r l h y ever.lr,g,

txo nl ;hts

x-12

t.?at

t k e

21.

19 Febrx r ry Nel ther Century P laza Trave l ncr

r a the r

t h sn Sa tc rcay even l r .g ,

FesrLzry.

Mrs.	S?el rs had heard

a n y t h m g o f

t h e r e d u c e d

Singapore

s t a y

o r

t n e e a r l l s r

r e t u r n u n t l l

th l s

time.

Mrs.

S p e l r s

was

a d v l s e d o f

t n e p o s l t l o n

E5out

January,

1982.

She

was

t o l d

t h a t

Pk. Eandy

wno

1 s

t h e proprietor

of Century Flaza Travel had

teken

s t e p s

t o

t r y

t 3 h a v e

t h e

e x t r a

n l g h t

r e s t o r e c .

S n e

wes t o l d t n a t The day be fo re ,

i t were not

she would

receive

re fund .

21 January ,

1982,

Xr. Bandy

had

t e l e x e d

t h e d e f e n d a n t I n s t r o q t e r m s 2 r o t e s t l n g	a t	hnat had
hap?enea.

Mrs.

S p e l r s was

conzent

t o accspc

the

charge

Sne ay have

znouzht

sne

haa

otnrr

cholce.

The

ev idence does no t a l sc lose wha t

t he -3zs l t l on

b a s .

Zur lng Trave l apo log i s ing

her

absence

the 2efendsr . t

Y ~ O T ; ~

Cent’vy Plaza

fo r

t he

lnconven le rce caused

the

reduction

o f

t h e

t o u r .

The

l e t t e r acknowledged

tha t

t h s

advice of

the

change

shoula

nave

reacced

Century

F l a z e

T r a v e l

e a r h e r .

Any

embarrassment

caused

was

r e g r e t t e d .

Or. 2 J u n e ,

1 3 8 2 ,

d e f e r d z n t

w r o t e

b o t h

22.

Cen a p o l o g l s i n g f o r 1Ahnat

laza

Trave

and

!<rs. S p e l r s

a g c n

ha.d

ha-,pened.

I t wes

s a l =

t ha t

the

c h a n g e I n

l t i n e r a r y

"was

r e s u l t cf

A l r l l n e

r e s c n e d u l m g " .

g r e t l a payment

5100 was

made.

I t should be obse rved

pas s lng

t h a t

e l though ,

s e n s e ,

l c v ~ a s c o r r e c t zo

s e y t h a t

p-ob1e.n was

caused

a l r c r a f t r e s c n e d L l l n g ,

t h s hed

cccl;rred

June 1961 l ong

be fo re

Mrs.

S p a r s ned hooked.

The

l e t t e r

1 s o p e n t o t h e m f ? r e n c e t n a t

t h e

rescheduling

had

occurred

a t a

recer . t

lme.

I t had

cccurred

a t

r e c e n t

tlme,

tne pos l~ lor . nay nave Seer ! covered

bjr condzt lon 6 on The back 9:

che brochure

... h c h 1 s

headed "T3ur Changes".

But

coknsel

for t ke

de fendzn t

expres s ly dec l ined to pu t any submiss ion based

t h a t

p rov l s lon .

Tnz t

ices no

doubt

because

the

reschecu1lr .g

had

occur red

long

before

The booking.

In my

op ln ion

counse l

was No problem

r l g h t I n t h e s t e n d x h l c h

took.

would

nave a r l s e n If The defendanr.

had made P l a z a T r m e l , t h a t C l e r e

I t c l e a r

t o

t r a v e l a g e n t s , 1 n c l u d m S ; Z e R t u r y

was

problem eboEt

re turns

a t

l e z s t

e f t e r

31 Decemke:,

1984.

I n tke l l z h t o f

t n e h l s t o r y w n l c h

r e c o c n t e d t n i s c c u l d

.1ave

been dore ,

necessa ry

~ r o v i s l s n e l c z s l s ,

l ong be fo re

17 A q u s t ,

1981,

-then Mrs.

S p e i r s

booked

the

Tour.

Particularly 1s h a t s o 13

t h e

l l g h t of

t h e f a c t

Lhat Mrs.

Croucner 's

documentat lon

shows t n e t t n e r e t w n was f l r m l y booked 311

F r lday ,

Fecrua ry ,

1282,

2L June ,

1291.

Furzher o u t of a cornT1alr.t made by the Consuner

ldence

to whlch

s h o u l d r e f e r a r c s e

Affairs

Eureau

(N.S . \ J . )

on o r a'coEx 4 Janue ry ,

15&2.

i t nad

received cor?.;

laln?s

fron

two 3Essengers Sooked

t h e

t o u r s c h e d u l e d

t c d e p a r t e e r l l = r

rkar

illrs.

S?elrs '

t o u r .

W E S scheduled

t c l e a v e on

9 January ,

I C E . 2 ,

and t o

r e t u r n

o n

23 Canuary,

1962.

The passenge r s

had

complained

t h e n e e d t o r e t d r n

day ee r ly

s r d

of a r e c a l l e d t ha t

s n o r t e n e d

s t a y

In Slngapore.

I t v111 be

e a r l i e r s a l d

tha t

was

s a r i s f l e d

t h a t

the passecgers on

x m s t o u r d l d r e t u r r , a

dey

e a r l i e r . The compialnt was made t o 2 Mr. Eyrne.

oroLght

I t t o xhe

a t t e c t l s r , o f Yr.

\;'oodcock,

the

24.

manager of

t h e

o p e r a t l o n s

e c r l o n .

Mr.

~Vooccock

was unaware

tne

problem.

The

1n ;u l r l e s

mzde l e d hlm r e s c h e d u l m g o f a n a l r c r e f t ,

t o s a y

t h a t

t h e 3 r o b l e m

was

due

t o t n e

2 s t a t e m n t w m c h t n e

Consumer

K f a l r s i3ureau appears

t o have accepted ,

a t l e a s t t l o n s ,

a t t n a t tme .

Xr.

';ioodcock gave mst ruc-

so he

s a l d ,

t h e t a l l p a s s e R g e r s

l a t e r

t ou r s

were

t o

be notified cf

the

?roblem.

E l t n e r

hls recollection were no t ce r r l ed ou t because rhe re

1 s a t f a u l t o r 1-11s l n s t r u c t l o n s

W E S

p e r t l c d a r

n o t l f l c a t l o n

t o

Zrs.

S p e l r s o f the

change.

The

rms

rke

lnvolce

referring

t o " r e d u c e d

l r n d

:est"

'nolrld

sugges t

t h a t 11 w2s

s e n t on

rho

b a s l s m a t s n e

mew.

i n f a c t ,

a s

i Rave s a d , n e l t n e r

C e c t u r y

P laza Trave l no r she

!<nevJ m y t h n l j .

o f

the cnenge

until

t h e

1nGlru-y

-*as

mzde

a s a

r e s L l t o f

t h e s e n a l n g

t h a t

I n v o l c e . Other evldence

whlcL: I

should mentloc

1s t n a t o f

2 Mr.

Mlrchel l of Gantas end

Fr.

Holloway .,h0 was

I n the employ

the

defendar.t .

h e v e

t a k e n

t h e i r

e v l d e n c e g e n e r a l i y i n t o a c c o u r t k u t

n o t f l n d

i t

necessa ry

r e f e r t o

t k . ?

2 e c a l l o f

~ t .

F l n a l l y ,

I n

r e l a t l m

t c

:ne

evl:::erce,

- s h r ~ l c :

mention

t k a t :?S.

S?:e:rs

does

no t

seem

have

been

a t a l l u p s e t

the cnange.

The

t e n o r

o f

h e r

evl?ence

was

t h a t s h e

has

; u l r e s a x s f i e d

& l t h

t h e t o u r m a t t e r s h a d b e e n l e f t

a n d

a p p e a r s

t o

heve erqoyed I t .

t o

Rer

she

would

not have

taken any actlor. .

or done Enythlng

abouc

It.

However, Mr.

Bandy took a Test se r lous v l ew

of t h e

posl t lor? .

Hls

t e l e x

t o

t n e

d e f e n d e n t

I n

t n e

s t r o n g e s t

e r m s .

Mr.

E a l y vdas

ocvlously

concerned

akour

the change

a n e a r h e r s t a g e b u t

thls

r a y

have

been

' cecaue che

te rmnatcr

f11rht no

longer went

t o Xelbourne ra ther

than because

any

s h o r t e n l n g of

t h e t o u r

I tself

t k e s t 2 y

lr? Slngapore.

IvIrs .

Cree W E S

:oncernea

a'ccut

i t 2nd i lerself

enceav-

oured

s o m e t h m g

r e s t o r e

t h e

p o s l t l o n .

Tv40

pessengers

t h e

e e r l l e r

t3u r were a l so co rxe rned

a t m e

s h o r t e n l n g .

I t 1 s now

a p p r c p r l a t e t3

s t a t e my

f m a l n g s

f a c t .

They

a r e :

1. Notice F r lday S lngapore depa r tu re

the

chenge

frcm

t h e

S e t u r d a y

t o

t h e

was	g iven the de fepden t

by	2 a n t a s In Zuce 1981.

26.

24 June 1981, a l l aepartures

between

Auzust

and Xcve?nter

1931

l n c l u s l v e had

beer.

bookea

flrmly

on QF2 t o

d e p a r t

r e l e v a n t

S a t u r d a y .

P a s s e n g e r s

f o r t h e o n e r e m l n l n g r e t x n

1981

w e r e , h a l t

l l s t e d

for t h e ,:F2

S s t u r d a y f l l p t .

u r a b l e

t o

s a y

when

the bookmg

became

a v a l l a b l e , b u t

w o u l c

l n f e r

t h a t

t h l s

occurred wel l

ber’ore

the

end of

the year

I n l i k e c a s e

1 s

t h e

departure

scnecu lec

l e e v e

Slngapore

Saturday,

9 JaRuary, 1082.

The

passengers

b e r e

booked

;F96

b c c b a i t l l s t e d

CF2.

24 June 1981 a l s o ,

t h e

f l n a l

d e p a r t u r e

o n

10 Apr-11, 1962,

:vas

booited

f z r a l y t c

r e t c r n o n

t n z t

day

( the Sa ru rday)

er;

ZF2.

A521n on 24 June 1981,

t h e

aepe r tu re s

ched- l ed

t c

ieave

S lngapore

or; Sa tu rday ,

2 3 Janua-y

ar.2

20 February ,

1982, were

rescheduled

l e z v e OR F r l d a y ,

22 Januery an< passengers were never

F e z r u a r y r e s p e c t l v e l y .

,ne

walt

l l s t e d er! GF2

to a e p r t

on	tne Sa tu rday .

I am unable m make a y flrm I l rx i lng

concern lng

tne depa r tu re schedu led

i eave S lngapore

Sa tu rday ,

20 March, 1982.

I t is unnecesszry

se .

27.

d t n o u g h Mr.

Plaster gave h l s evidence

h o n e s t l y ,

n o t

a c c e g t

hzs

e v l c e n c e

t n a t

t h e r e

were ,by ea r ly Ju ly

1381

o r a t a l i ,

flrm

s ta t e -nen t s

on behalf

'2ar . tas

that

a l l d e p u t u r e s up

t o 31

Janua ry ,

1982, would be car r iec!

tne

turaay

ZF2, and

t n a t

t h e r e a f r e r

ell

d e p a r t u r e s would

have

t c

l e a v e

c n

t h e

h-lday on ;F$6.

The aocurnentatlcn

a g a l n s t

hls

r e c o l l e c t l o n

being

a c c u r a t e

m e s e

r e s p e c t s .

I do

acce?t

Mr.

S a l l y ' s

e v i a e n c e

t h a t

u r . t l l

about SepteGber

19E1 ne

.nentloned

the

w t r e r from

tlme

T;S t i r e t o i b : r .

P l z l s t e r I n

an eraeavour

t o rr21n-

tarn

t h e o r l g l n a l S a t u r d a y d e p a r t u r e s

I n r e s p e c ;

a l l t o u r s .

BLT; I

n o t atle

t c say ; r l t n

c e r t e l n t y

how <he rnztter was l e f t .

;h:nk

:he

p r o b a b l l i h e s

a r e rhat

~n the

mlnds

o f

the

tkc Ten ,

t h e

pro5ie.r:

was

so lved , a l rhough no t

lr.

T;he way

Mr.

F k l s t e r r e c e l l e d ,

t o

d e g r e e I n t h e e a r l y

srages

2nd

t h e m e t t e r

was

rhen OverlooKed. p r e s s u r e h e a p p l l s d

Mr. E e l l y

c e a s e d

t c

e x e r t

h e

when

t h ?

?rcblem

fxsz a r o s e

~ h 2 t

n o t h l c g

ives

d o n e a b o u t t n e l a t e r i e p a r - t u r e s

26.

h h l c h , ofi 24 J m e , 1981, hzd

been

Sookea

t o r e t u r n

or? t he F r rday . k e p t by Mrs. Cree x d ;v:rs.

e e r l l e r

m e n t l o n e d , Croucher

t h e

s c h e d u l e s

tend

show,

because of

The

absence of any

re ference

t o

walt

i l s t l n g on

OF2,

t n a t Plr.

3 a l l y ' S

e f f o r t s m r e n o t

l e a d l n g v e r y f a r .

So frr as t n t records of Lentas anc, t ne

de fendap t

disclose,

t h e t o w o r l g n e l l y

i r . ter .ded

leave

Slnga?ore

on Sz turday , d e p a r t on F r i d a y ,

February ,

1982,

was

r e s c h e c L l e d

t o

Februery,

1982.

Thet

cnenge

'>,as

nede on 24 June , 19S.1.

There

tke

mat

s tood .

Tne

fec t t k t 13s zhange n ~ d

beer-- x d e -*vas k n o w $0 Mrs.

Croucher

and

ther

employees

o f

che defendan t .

I n

t a e l l g h t

o f Mr.

2zl;y's

ev lannce , I 2~ not

accepr

;

cha

i t was I n f a c t known t o hlm, !xt 8 s e rrexter of ;)I*C)per

b u s m e s s p r a c t l c e

ought

heve been.

The

defendenr;

d l a

no t

no t l fy

any

o f

I t s

a g e n t s

the

ckaEge.

I n particular

It d ld .

no t

no r l fy

Cen

twy

Plaza

Trave l .

1C. The S p e i r s made her cooklng or! 17 .-ugLst,

a l t e r r t l o n nec i l r e a d y

b e e r

made :nen hrs.

i.521.

The

p o s ~ t i o n

was

unchanged when

sne ?sela

f o r t h e t c u r

on 3 December,

1961, 2nd *her,

Cent-ry Plaza Travel

o n

t h a t d a y ,

o r a

day

o r s o l a t e r ,

eccr,unter,

t o

c h e

d e f e n d a c t

f o r

tkr; 2ayment.

A t :he

t m e

s n e

p a l d h e r

money

Mrs.

S p e l r s e x p e c t e d

t o

l e a v e

Singapore on Sz tu rday , 26 February, 1562.

11. On 9 December, 1981, The aefec?zr?x

caused

t l c k e t s

t o

b e

l s s u e d

f o r

DIrs.

S p e i r s '

f l l p h t s .

These lncluded t ravel t c Sydney

t l c k e t e n t l t l l n g

I~lrs. S p e i r s tc

SF96 d e p a r t i n g Singapore

? n d e y ,

15 Fex-uary ,

1982.

12.

The t l c k e t s

a n c

tin

i t l n e r e r y

r e a c h e d

i\:?s.

S p e l r s

In the l e a r n e d f o r

mlda le

of Januzry 1982.

I t was

ther. t h a t she

t h e

f i r s t t lme of

che

shor tenea

tour .

The

f lrst quesz lon 1s wher;ner

t h e r e 1 3 ,

f o r tr,e

purposes

s . 5 8 ,

m a t e r l a l d l f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n

The

t o u r f o r

whhlch

Mrs.

Spe l r s pa ld and

tha t vh ich

i n

fac t h26.

l e a v e

e s l d e ,

for t ne

pu ryose

o f

d e a l l n g

wl th t h l s 30 th counse i were agreed

s u b m l s s l o n , a n y z . u ? s t l m c f

I n t e n t i o n .

t h a t

t h e t e s t

o b a e c t l v e

one.

I s h a r e Their cormon view.

ELT I

chlnk I t

m a t e r i a i ,

I n o m e r

COFE

t c a

c s n c l n s l s c ,

t a x €

l n t o a c c o u n t

t n e v a r l o u s

vlelz's

&xch

t n s r e a r e

I n t h e

ev;dence

t o the n a t e r l e l l x y of

t h e

d l f f e r e n c e

.vrh~cn t h e r e

1s.

the

one

l and

Mrs.

S p e i r s

d l d

n o t a p r , a r e n t l y c o n s l d e r

t h e r e

t o be

any

problem

about

what

nappened.

zhe

o ther hand

t r ave l egen t , ? r e sumab ly exFer l encea

zhe

lnduscry

If one nas

r ega rd

tne

number

t r ansac t lons

zh rougn

the

t : ~ o

r e c e l p t b o c k s

hn lcn a re

In ev ldence , cons l ae red

the Ta tTe?

was

s e r l o u s .

The

c o n c e r n

I n

t h e

d e f e n d e n z ' s

o f f l c e

I t s e l f

shows

thls

k e

t h e c a s e a s a o e s

t n e c o n -

c e r n

o f

t h e

Consmer Lffa17s Eureau

c e h e l f

o f

two

o t h e r

p a s s e n g e r s .

i n

the

one

has

? lake

a essessmen' of ztie Obviousljr a

slruzt:on

c e s t o z e c a .

q u e s t l o n of

degree 1s Involved

and

e v a l u a t l o n 1s necessz ry .

need

t o Se

s e t i s f l e d

t o

the

r e q u l s l t e s t a n d a r d t h a t

:he

d l f f e r e n c e

was

material,

t h a t i s ,

the mac te r

1 s er. e lemen t

the

offence which

cnarged and aust be proved beyond

reasonable doubt .

Hav lng r e f l ec t ea on

the me t t e r

have

reachea

the

c l e a r c o c c ~ u s ~ o r . t h a t t h e a l f f e r e z c e

-:.es

31.

m a t e r l a l .

one l o o k s E t t'ne

b r o c n u r e

h h c h

conca lns

the

vzr

ious

scovery

Tours

whlck

were

t h e n a v a l l a c l e o n e c a r , s e e h l g h l l g h c e d a t

t h e

t o p

e a c 9 p a g e t h e l e n g t h o f t h e t o u r s t a t e d

days

and

n lghts .

Those

who

formula tec

b r o c h u r e

t h o u g h t

t i e

l e n g s h o f

t h e

t o u r

I m p o r t a n t .

Tne

o v e r a l l p e r l o d

ls, i n round

tcrms,

fourceen

hour

per lods

o r a

l l t t l e more.

The

r e d u c t l o n

was

t o

t n i r t e e r . 2 4 n o u r p f r l o d s

o r

l l t t l e

n o r e .

Furthermore,

s t a y o f

t n r e e d a y s a n d

t h r e e

C i , C h L S

In Slngapore Many ?eople

was

c u r t a l l e c i

one 24 nom pe r lod .

all1 nzve different reasons for t c l n k l n g

c h a t a

r e d c c t l o n of

day was

o r was

n o t ma's?r:al.

sone It may

nave s u t e c t n e n t c r e t u r n

a day

e a r l i e r .

Euc

one must

bear

I n mnd

t h a t

t n e

r e s e r v a t l o n was

f o r 2

t o u r of

zne

advertised

lengzh.

Some

would have been a tmactea

t n e f a c t t h a t t n e y

w o d d be

away

from

Australia

f o r a

f u l l 1 4 d a y s .

l j t ne r s would

Aave

r ega rdec

1 z as

xnpor t an t

t h a t

they

n a v e

t h r e e

f u l l d a y s ,

r a t h e r

t h a n

t w o ,

In S lngapore .

32.

They -nay have f e l t t h a t the!,

d l d cor; have enocgh

t r n e t o s e e

I t

p - o p s r l y

o r

t o

shop adecua te ly

w a t 1s r ecogn l sed as

one

the

a t t r a c t l v e

shopping

p l a c e s

t h e

Easr.

Yet

o t h e r s ,

o n

n e a r i n g o f

t h e r e d u c t i o n ,

may

have wlskea

tney

had

been

informed before

they

booKea

o r Fald

t n e l r

money

so tne r ;

t hey co l~ l5 neve

r econs lde red

their

d e c i s l o n t o t a k e

Tour

526

r a t h e r t n e n

different

one.

The

reasons

all1 Se many a n 6

v a r l s a

sca t he

lmpact

t h e ;?roblern

or? people

wlll

p r o v o k e d l f f -

e r e r t

r e a c t i o r x .

BUT

a l l

the

c l r c u m s t a r z e s

nave

c l ea r co r .v l c t lo r !

t h a t

t h e a i f f e r e n c e

was

material.

The

f irst

subrn l s s lon

mae

beha l f

o f

tL1e d e f e n a i c t

1 s accordingly

r e J e c t e d .

I n r e l z t l o n t c t h e s e c c m s u ' c r n l s s l s n m n z l o n

The

c o u r s e o f

t n e

argurnenc

t n a t o c c u r r e a I n

was

aade

of whether ,

I n

a d c l t l o n t o m v m g

establish

t h e

l n t e n t for Whicn

t h s s e c c l a n

3rovlc!es,

cce

1nf~rm2nt

naa

t o e s r a b l l s h a l s o

mens

r e a , 1 . e .

gul1r;y

mlnd

m e p a r t

o f

t h e d e f e n c z n t .

was

r e f e r r e d

t o

the

33.

g e n e r a l p r l n c l p l e s w h c h a r e s t e t e d

lr!

n u ~ z ? r

o f

c a s e s ,

c h e a o s t

r e c e n t . o f

which

1 s "arerm

V. Z o l t

(1980) 142 C.i.R.

342.

O f more

d l r e c t

r e l e v a n c e

a r e d e c l s l o n s o f

t h l s

Court dezimg

. ," i rh

rhe problerr

I n r e k t l o n t o c e r t i i n

o f

t he p -ov l s lons

o f

i h v l s l o n

1 o f

F a r t

o f

m e Act.

The

on ly

one

t hese

t o

. ~ h l c h

I need

rer^er

1 s 3 a r v d x B a ~ e r y P t y . L1n1ted

S u l l y (1281) 36

x.L.R.

371, a d e c l s l o n of

F c l l Court

o f

t n l s

C o u r t .

T h e r e

t h e

2 o u r t

was

c ? n c s r z e c

u i t h

subrn iss lon

tha t

;he 11ab111ty lmposed by s.53 of

rne Act

vdas

s t r l c t agd

t n a t It ws

n o t n e c e s s ~ r y f c r

p r o s e c u t l o n

t o

p r c v e

g c i l t y mlna.

The

subnlss:m

was upheld.

The Court s a d (p .376) :

":hhlle I t 1s r e l e v x t tl;

s e e FT V

05 the Act

a s a

p l e c e

cDnsumer

w o t e c t l o r , l o g i s l s t l o n ,

we d3 t o d i s ? l a c e

n o t

r e , o a r c t h a r a s s u f f l c l e n r o f I t s e l f

t:1e

o rd lna r ;

r e -n l r ewnr o f

mer.:

r e a .

Sec+:on

53 does

language

comparable

i n

c e r t a l n r e s p e c t s t c

tkr: cor.s;dered

r;ne

3,ch

C o u r t

i n

Cameron

v . H o l t , m p r a ,

a n a

t h e r e

c a n

no doubt

tha t

s.79 prescribed a p e n e l t y ,

lndeed a very heairy one. Nor c a ~

t h e r e

S e

2r,y

d o u b t t h a t

c o n t r a v e n t l c n

z r o v l s l o n c f

P t V,

o t h e r

t h a n

5 . 5 2 ,

r e s u l t s

I n

' c o n v 1 c t l o z ' .

But t h e A c t 3 o i r t s

s r e of

t h e o p l n l o r

t n a t

t n e e x l s t e n c e

s.83

I n r e g e r d t c c c n t r s v e n t l o n s

or'

F t

s $ l l c y on

t k e

?ar t

t n e

l e g l s l a t u r e c h a t

t-le

abse-cce

o f

3rAe c 1 t h e

d e f e n c e s t n e r e

.rient;ored

the

I l a ' c l i l t:-

lyposed

34.

"by s.53

1s s t r l c c .

? o r e

p a r r l c u l a r l y ,

The

case o f

s . 5 5 ( e ) ,

I t

unnecessa ry

establish kncwledse 3f

t'ke

f a l s l z y of

t h e

s t e t emen t

o r

r e c k l e s s l n d l f f e r e s c e a s t c

1r;s

t r u t h o r f a l sehood .

The

range

defer ices

i n s.85

1 s wlde - reasonable

mis

take

;

reason-

a b l e r e h a m e

in fo rme t ion

s u p p l l e d

'cy

ano the r ;

con t r even t lon

due

t h e a c t

o r d e f a u l t

o f

a n o t h e r

o r

t o a n a c c l d e n t

o r

some

cause beyond

t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s c o n t r o l w h e r e

t h e d e f e n d a n t n a s

tzken

reasonable preceut lons and exerc lsed

dLe

d l l i gence .

The re

a r e

F e r t l c u l z r

d e f e n c e s

I n

t k e

c a s e o f p u b l l c a t l o n

a n e d v e r t l s e m e n t a c d i n

t h e c a s e o f

gcods

nor;

complylng wlth

s t a n d a r d .

I n a a d l t i o n ,

s . 2 5 ( 6 )

copfers upon

the

c o u r t

gane ra l excu lpa to ry

r;ower

where

? e r s o n o t h e r

zhap

body corpore te has ac ted hones t ly

rezsonably

am!

o u g h t f e l r l y , I n

a l l The

clrcum-

s t a n c e s o f

t h e c a s e ,

t o

b e

exccsed.

Tae

'creaath

t h e s e d e f e r c e s k r d l y a c c o r d s

w t n a

s l t u a t l o r ! I n w h l c h l l a b l l l t y d e p e n l

P S

any

even t

uzon

e s t ac l l sh ing

nens

r ea .

Rzzne

i t a s s ~ m s

I l e ' c l l l t y a r l s l r , ;

f rov concuc r ;

ObJeCtlvely measured, bur; Lvxch may be

Evoided

the p roof

o f n a t t e r s ? e c u l l a r l y

'.::thm

The

kr.o:Jledge

cf che aef endenr

ques t lc r . arlses

r;o

whether

s h c c l 5 a p p l y

t h s

z p 3 r o a c h I n r e l e t l o n t o

of fence

w!nck

p l a l c l y

l n v o l v e s

rnentel

element

In That

wlll

not ce commlt ted unless

t h e d e f e n d a n t t h e p r l n c l p l s s t a t e d

h a d

t n e

r e e u i s i t e

I n r e n t .

I n

a y

o p i n l o n

t h e Full

Court heve

emqual

a p p l l c a t i o n

t o

an of fence

under

s .58 .

!.ihat

m e

p r o s e c u t l o n

xust

esT;abilsh beyond rezsonakle aoubt

i s

t n e e x l s t e n c e o f m e

l n r m t f o r d - . i c : ~

t h e s e c t l o n

35.

prov ldes .

r h a t

l n t e n t

1 s

e s r a b l l s h e d

n o

fur

ther Neve r the l e s s

menzel

e lement

1s Involved.

l c 1s

the

subm2sslon

o f

s e n l o r

c o u n s e l

f c r

t h e d e f e n d a n t

char

the p rosecu t ion h2s

n o t e s t a b l i s h e d submlsslon

t k e

r e G u l s i t e

i n t e n t .

Ir. h i s

n e c e s s a r y ,

t h e p r o s e c u t l o n

t o s u c c e e d , a k i e d o u b t t h a t

f o r . l t

t o S e e s t a b l l s n e d b e y o n d

r e a s o n -

tae

cer‘en5ariz

one

or 30”e of I t s

s e r v a n t s

a g e c t s ,

z c t u a i l y

a d v e r t e d ,

a t

t h e

t l m e

I t accepted Krs.

S p e l r s ‘ money

e z r l y m

Decen4er,

1981, t o t he h e r money f3r a 14 day

c l r c u n s t a n c e

t ha t

Nrs.

S p e i r s was

paylng

tou r ,

‘cut

:.roul5,

and was

l n t f n d e d

r o ,

r e c e l v e i n s t e a d

13 2ay

t cu r .

I n

r t i e s u b m s s l o n o f s e n l o r c c u n s e l

f o r

t h e

p rosecu t lon

was

unnecessEry

f o r zkc-

p r o s e c u t o r

t o e s t a b l l s h

t h a r !

t n a t , a t

t k e

r m e

t n e

money

was

aczeprea ,

the

Zefendanz ,

l t s s e r v e r r s

a n d

a g e n t s ,

m z e n d e d

t o

p r o v l d e

13 day

t ou r .

I t

was

n o t n e c e s s e r y

t h a t

r h o s e s e r v a z t s e n d a g e n t s

snohla

be shown, t h e a c c e p t a n c e

as well ,

t o h a v e

i n t e n d e d ,

a t

t n e

time

o f

t h e

money,

t o p r o v l d e

tour whlch

wou ld be ma te r l a l ly d l f i e r en t f rom

t h e t

for

whlch

t h e y knew

the money was

p a i d .

A l t e r n a t l v e l y

I t

was

s u b m l t t e d

t h a t

I sqould

I n f e r , b e c a u s e n o n o t l f l c a t l o n

tk:?

sho rzen lpg

05 t h e t o u r s h e p a l d h e r

had

b e e n g l v e r

I v I r s .

S p e l r s ac

zhe

tlme

money,

rhat

che re

were

t h o s e

t n e

defendant TNho

knew t h a t s c e

was

payFng

for t h e l&

day

tour

and who accepted her ooney

t h a t

f o o t i r ? g .

The

f a c t T h a t

t h o s e s e r v a n t s

anb

a g e n t s

may

nor:

have

beer. t h e same t n u s 3 r o v l d l n g h e r

as cnose

.&no ef fec ted

r ,e r booklngs ,

bdicn

L.3

c a y t o w , b a s

SaiG

n o t

t o be to

tbe

?o lnr : .

Looked

a t

s b ; e c t l v e l y

t h e

d e I ^ e n d x t by

v a r l s r y o f s e r v e n t s a n d

aclects

was,

s o 17; was	subml t t ed , shown 'c2 keve nad t n e requisite
n t e n t .

furz i?s r e l te l - r la t lve

submlss lon

was

t h z t I

s h c d c fln.~

t h e

r e q u l s l t e

l c t e n t

b e c a u s e

e v l d e p c e

e s t a b l l s h e d

';hat

t h s

d e f f n d e c t ' s s e r v e f i t s

arc:

2genr:s

h a d a c t e d w l t n s u c n r e c k l e s s l n c l f f e r e n c e t h a t

lr:

'was appa ren t t n e mocey was

che

de a c c e p t e s for somctnlng :uhlch

fencmz

l . . ne tne r

was

t n e

same

o r materially

d l f f e r e n r : from

t h a t f c r

wnlch

i t

aas p a d .

t n l n k t h e s e v a r i c u s

hzys

p u c t ~ n s

che

p r o s e c u t l c E ' s

c a s e

chro-*: U?

d i f f l c u l t l e s which

3 7 .

t h e r e

a r e I n a c c e p t m g a n y

view

the

proper

c o n s t r u c t l o n o f

;ne

s e c t l x c r h e r

chan

tna t

conzenaea for by senlor

counse;

f o r

tile

t e f e n c a n t .

3 e

d e s c r l b e d t h e s e c t l o n a s o n e

t c

p r c n l b i t c h e a t -

m g m a commerclal

cor.text.

Ir, my v i e w

t h a t

ar.

a p t d e s c r l ? t l o n

o f

l t .

Liher co rporauon adve r t ec l

a u s t

e s t a t l i s n e d 1s h a + , ;ne

de fendac t

t o

the

gravamen

m e m a t t e r

whlcr. The only form an mzer i t lon

s e c t l o p makes

a r

o f f e n c e .

S l n c e

11 cer.

througn

tne mnd

or mnds

o f

Its agen t or ager,r;s,

r;he o f f e n c e wlil

n o t b e committed

u n l e s s

li:

proved beyond

reasonEcle

doubt

that

one

a g e n t s t u r n e d

h l s or

t h e i r a t t e n t i o n ,

a t

t h e

t i m e

o f

t h e accc;car.ce

o f

cmtcmer ' s mcrey ,

n o t orl;.

t o ~ n a t

1~ x.:zs

t h a t

' h o u l i

s e s s p o l l e d b u t

a l s o t o w k t n e r tha t for m l c h che money was bemg

tti2-c

',vas

r n a t s r l a l l y a l f f e r e n t

from

accepted .

Only

~f chey knew ct-.at whzt was o r would

su?pl;?d

W E S

or vdould r;ke money ' N ~ S

c e m s t e r l a l l y d l f 5 e r e n t f r o m c h e t

f a r

!..clch

a c c e p t e d ,

will

;ne

r e G u l s l t e

l n y l n t l o n

be establishea.

Su-,?ort 2cr tbaz v:w

IS, lr -.ly

op1c lon ,

t o

.se

f o u n d

I n

t n e

I u d g e n t

5rrl:ners

J .

I n ._

Aearaon v. r<orle>

f o r a

? ty . L iml tec

( 1 ? & C )

A.L.R.

417 p a r u c u l e r l y

a t

p.L;24.

Thex was a

c e s e

.under

s.56

d e z l i n g d I t h

t a t a d v e r t - s l c g .

The

p r o v l s l o n

l n

Gues t lon

sas

sub-sec .5

(1) ,:h:c?,

Ilk s . 5 8 ,

h a s as one 3f I t s elements

the

:nter . t

corpora t -on .

f c l l o w s

t h a t

n o t s u l f l c l e n t ,

In r,y

a p l n i o n ,

t o

e s t a b l l s h ,

t he

ev l aence

here

c l e e . r l y d o e s e s t a t l l s h ,

xo1"e

than

t k t 2 t cne

xlme t n e Eone:i kas

2ccePtea

tnc

ZefTrdenc

cy I t s

egents

In tendeL

3rovide

2 1; day

tour .

;!het

must be defecdans cy

e s t e b l l s n s i a d d l t l o n e l l y

thex

che

t h e same a g e n t s , or by

c x e r zgsnzs

p r l v y

t o t h e knovlledge

m e t che

tour

t o be

s u p p l l e d was

l n r e n d e d t o

13 day

tou r ,

accepted

tne cusrover ' s noney knowlng

w2s

paid

for a 14 day

tour .

Ctherwlse

t h e

c o r p c r i u o n

n o t show?. t o !leve 1nte:aed

X smpl:;

so-.ethlcq

whlch

wss

. n e r ; e r l a l l y d l f f e r e z x

frs-n t h a t

for

h'snrcn

t h e

money

W E S p e l d .

I n

o r d e r

m a t

c o r p o r a t l o n

mey be t h o s e a c t l n g f o r

s h o m

t o

h a v e h e d t h e r e , ; u s i t e m t e r t ~ o n ,

must

showr.

to keve beer.

p o s l t i o n t o a p p l y t k e l r f i r n d s

xhe

c x e s t l o n

o f

v,hetner <./het was

t o be supsi leci :;0~16

s o m c t x n g

m a x e r l a l i y c l f f e r e n t

f r3T

t h a t for

t n e

cus tomer ' s

money

was

accepted .

30~4 cEn

one

lntend

t o s u p p l y s o v e t h l n g d l f € e r e n t

fr3m

t h a t

f o r

>.vhlch

one accepts

c u s r c m e r ' s money,

m e 5oes nor

a p F r e c l a t e

,tmzt

f o r w a i c h

t h e c u s t c m e r ' s

mane:?

1 s

c e l n g z z l d ?

The thax persons ac t lc ;

S u e s t l o n

1s w l e t h e r

1 snould

s a t l s z r e r ,

for

the Jefenaa?r ;

d l d

have

the requuls l te ?a id Mlss Gol lan of Century P laza Trave i

in ren t lon .

Undoubtedly

iks .

S ? e l r s

for a

day

tour .

The

bock;ng

a d v i c e

d a t e c

3 December,

1981,

s e n t by

h s s G s l l a r ?

t o

t h e d e f e n d a n t o n

t n a t

dey

o r

day o r

s o

l a t e r a e s l g n a t e a t n e t o u r

- )hc r : wes

?a ld

for as

"Llsccvery

i - rc l idey

526

16 cays" .

The

a c v l c e c e r t e l n l y w e n t

t o

rtis

ciefenclint

but

LO winlcn 3f

Its s e r v a n r s or agencs I

u z a c l e

t o say.

Lndoubtedly

It l e d LO

t n e

n a x m g

the defendt int

o f

rjhe

v e r l o u s r e s e r v a r i o n s o n

Eece-nbcr,

1581, m c l u s l n g

t h 3

r e s e r v t i t l o n

cf a

s e a t f o r rirs. 3Fe:rs

r,n ',F96 departing SlngE2cre

on 19 'ebruary, no: 2C Februzry, 1982.

BLt 'ne

cr:r; lcal Cuestlon

1 s x h e t t x -

s n o d a be

satls-

f l e d beyond

rerscna-Lie dcLbt

chzt

servzyts

o r

a g e n t s

t h e

d e f e n d c n t ,

m y one

taem,

a t v e r t e ? ts f o r n x g a n l n t e n t l o r . p o s l u v e l y

;r.lat

has

flzpGemng

s e n s e c 9

t G

sm~l:yr a

t c u r

mats r la l ly ? l f f - . r snr .

f rom

t k t for ah:cr,

t n e pey-

- 0

nen t xas accep ted .

I~ t'rls nere a : lv i l

c e s e ard

r!le

scanuard

p r x f r e r e o n

b e l a c c e o f p r o t a i l l l s i e s ,

one

mlgh

conc

lude

tha t an mfe rence shou ld

crzwn

That zke

re. ;_ulsl ' ,e

Lntsntlon

-des e s ~ e b l l s a e d . But

zhe

case

1s a

c r l m n z l one.

Tke

s ramiard o f proof

1 s proof

beyond

reascrx'cle

dodbt.

i-Izvlng

r e f l e c r e d

t n s r a t t e r ,

urpersuaded

t k t xle

? r o s e c u r l a n

nes

e s t e b l l s h e d C n i s e s s e c t l E l

?a:",er.

41.

I shoul? add ; n e t

I nave

taxer? mrc ccn-

s i d e r I t l c n ,

I n

t h l s r e s?ec t ,

t ne

eg reemec t

counse l

t k t

Cer - t c ry P laza Trave l ac t ed cn rxgnou t

as Fn agent

and

cot a s a p - l t x l p a l .

Thus i t xay

'ce

t.12t

Ylss Gol lan o r Century Plaza Travel

'#as

s c t l n g IS

t n e d e f e n d s n t ' s a g e n t

,:dkeE

I'Lss

Gol lan

rccepced Id-s.

S p e l r s ' -nore::

on 3 Lecevlccr, L921.

Assumlng thet CO have

3eer:

s o ,

t n e p r o s e c u t l o n ' s

c a s e

1 s n o

fur tnhr

advar lcec .

Mlsc

Gollm accepted

t h e n o n e y i o r

day

tour

2nd l n t ended I'ks.

S y e l r s

t o

n a v e

s u c h

t o u r .

T h c t

tkme

S L r z c r t

o f her prablems whlcn

bcoklng

aa711ce.

She

Kreb: nstk1r.g of h e

cher

ex lscea

re l t i t ion

t,?

t h e d a t e

d e p a r t u r e

f rom

Singapore.

, k e

t c z a l i t y

the

eviclerce

tends t o

s u g g e s t

t h e t

tms

unfor tuna te ? roblern

has

not brcught eboLt

b y a c y d e l l b e r e t e

o r l n t ended conc ix t

t h e p a r t

t h e d e f e n d a c t . n o t l i y C e n t u r y

I t was

ceused

I t s failure

t o

? laze

Trave l

t n e p r c b l e n o e f o r e

Mrs. S p e l r s ' book;r,-

was Tade sn:

.Ier money acceyced.

{ ine t

hp?ened

wes t nsc i4r. Dall:J

t.lo,gkt

:ki t

- .

could

averccve

The

7 r c - s : w .

subs:ecElzl

o e g r e e

42.

ne a id . malxzaln

Eut

r,:hrough

o v e r s i g h t

h e

n e g l e c x e d

t o

the p r e s s u r e h e

orlg1nal:y-

exer ted on

Qan tas .

And,

~n c a s e

h l s

e f r ^ o r t s

f a l l a d ,

h e

neg lec t ed

to nave

:he

d e f e n d a n t ' s a g e n t s a d v l s e d

t n a t c h e r e

was

o r m g h t be

proble-n

r e l a t l o r .

t o t o u r s su re he

r e t u r m n g a f t e r

the end o f

1981.

would

t h e

f lrst

copcede

That

should

nave

seen

it tha t ager . t s were

notifies

thar,

people

such

a s Mrs.

S?el rs

re iy1r .g on

tne

brochure

bould

nor, be

mlsled.

Tnus

:ne

c a s e 1s

i n

the

r e a l m o f o v e r s l g h t , n e g l e c t

and

c a r e l e s s n e s s .

I t

i s n o t

l n

t h e c a t e z o r y

p c s l t l v e 1 n t e r . t

t o

f o l s t on a cus tomer sone th lng ma te r : a i iy c l f f e ren t from t h a t for -6hlch :?IS money hes been accepted .

The

t h i r d

a i t f r n e t l v e s u b m l s s l o n

r e l i e d

upon

3y tne a n 5 l n d l f f e r e n c e

- , rosec t lor .

1s basea

31: a112ged recklessness

o f

che

d e f e n d a n t

I n a c c e c t l n g

t h e

money

a s t o m c h c z z e

t ha t

I t

d i d n o t c a r e w h e t h e r

t h e t o u r h e r e 1s	was t o b e	13r l& days 3r 1:	days.	i t k l n k
L

q u e s t l o n as

w h e t h e r

t h e

r e s u l s l t e

mr , en t lon

cou ld

e s t a b l l s h e d

l n

r,hls wzy.

expres s no

vlew.

i 20 SE^, nowever, chec if reck-

iess r .ess

and

lnc l f fe rsnce ccc1- l

estao;:ch

zke

45.

r e q u l s l r e

i n t e n t l o n ,

They would Lee6 t o be c f

a high o r d e r .

I am not

sa t1sf :ed

tha t

. < k x

nappeL1ed n e r e vdas due t o more

tr-an neglecr;

c a r e l e s s n e s s f a l l l n g

f a r

s n o r t

r e c k l e s s n e s s

o r l n d l f f e r e n c e .

do n o t wlsh

to mlnlmlse

a t

a l l t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s f a l u r e t o n o n r ' y

I t s

q e n t s

o f

t h e

FroClen when It became

awzre

3_f I t .

But

a m certainly

n o t

sa t lsf led

r h a t Its

d e f z u l t i n

thls

r e s2ec t

amoun t s

t o

The

g o s s mlsconduct

a l l e g e d

t h e p r o s e c u t l o n .

I t was

s a l d

s e n i o r c o u n s e l f o r

:he

prosec-

u t l o n t k t tc

c c n s t r u e tne

s e c t l o n as

b e l l e v e

should t e consxrueci 1;;oclti be ;o

c e f e a t 1 ~ s

ob;ect.

3u t t k d t s ldhlsslsn 1s sf

h e l p ;

l c 1s e :desxlcn

o f cons lde r lnp

I t s terms

a m arr ;ving

z t 1cs t r u e

meamxg.

-nac

:S what I have

cdeavoured

do.

I n t h e s t r u c t l o n o f

same

v e l n

s e n l o r c o u n s e l

s a l c

t h a t

con-

I t	Imporred an addl t lona l menta l e lemer t

m t o

t h e

o f f e n c e

w h l c h

not

chere .

BUT

a g a m

t h e

q u e s t l o n

1s one of

t h e c c n s t r u c x o n

o f

t h e

~ o r d s

vh lch

the

draf t sman

has

used .

The

y l s t

t he

o f f e n c e

i s LO InZen5 XI

supply

somexclng

rnaterlall . ;

c1fferer.

from

That

f o r wclch a Fayment 1s accepted .

I t

1s tha t f r o m t h e p r o s e c u t l o n ' s p r o o f I n

ln ten tc lon whlch ,

lr?

?ly

OFlRiOC,

e ' rsent

:h15

c a s e .

conclus lons xake

I t unnecessary

t o c o n s l d e r

the

de fences based upon the p rov l s lons

s,85

the Act . bench tney r a s e .

express

n o v l e b

or.

t k e

z o n s l a e r a t l o n s

i shou lc

a l so

Tsn t13n

t h a t

r e f e r e n c e was

mace

I n t h e

2rgurner.t

:?on

tlme

t o t l m e

to s.84

3f t he Act d e a l l n g '+lzc tne fixing of E

corporE t ion

VJltt-,

the intentions

i t s s e r v a n t s 3r

a g e c t s .

nzve

Taken

the

sectlm g e n e r a i l y

l n t o

~ C C O C : I I T ; X

d e a l l n g wltn

zks

varlous

subm1sslor

vhlch

h a v s a r l s e n

f o r

c o n s l d e r a t l o n .

Fo r

t a e r e z s s n s

have

glver.

I t is T I ~

o p l x o n

t h 2 t

t h e

l c f c r m e t l o n

snoLld

clzalssea.

Xowevsr,

s e x o r cour se1 For The p rosecsc lon ES

zsked me,

IÎ

tha t

should be

n e w , n o t

now

t o e n t e r

Judgment

t o

g i v e e f f e c t

t o

c c n c l u s l o n ,

t L t

t o

s t a t e a

c a s e o r

r e s e r v e

q u e s t l c n o r

questions

for

c o c s l d e r a t l o n

Fcll Courr; pu r suan t

suc-sec .25(6)

o f

t n e F e d s r a l

Court of q u e s t l m s w c u l c

Australia Act 1975.

The c a s e or :.le

r-ise

fJr

c o n s l d e r a t l o n

b y

F u l l

45.

Courr;

t h e p r o p e r c o n s t r u c t l o n

s .58

o f t h e

Act

I n

t n e

c c c t e x t

t h s case .

The

cour se

? r cpcsea

by t h e p r o s e c u r l o n defexdznt .

srrongly

oppTsed

t h e

The r eason for the r e q u e s t 1 s t n a t lf I

= l ve

e f f e c t t o

ny coxclus-on by dlsm1ss;r.g

the mformat:on,

t he p r o s e c u t l o n wlll

heve nc

r l q h t o f

ao?ea l ,

Judg-

merit

m o u n r l n g t o

E c s u l t t a l

o f

t ne de fendan t

c r l n l c a l

c h a r g e ;

r h o m s o n

M z s t e r t o u c h

TV‘

a e r v l c e s

P t y . L l n t e d

(1576) 19

;,.L.?..

547

a n a

r - u s r r e l l a n

S u l l d n g C o n s t r u c t l o n

Emoloyees

e t c . F e c e r e t l c n

Davld Syme 5. Co. (1382) &G .:..L.R.519

a t 3p.520-521.

d l d n o t say h h a t v1el.v

$he r e 4 u e s t 1 s o ~ l d

t a k e m

;he

e v e n t

t n a t

i e c l s l o n was

a d v s r s e

t o

t n e

p rosecu t lon .

s a l ? t h s t 2

tnoughr i t b e t r e r r ; ~

p u c l l s h

.ny reesons acd pro?osed

ccncluslor.

~ l c n

i EO?’, da .

1,111 allow an adJcsrmrent

so t n z t t h e

parties 2nd tnelr

l e g a l

a d v l s e r s

mey

conslder

what

I have sald.

I f ,

when

t h e m a t t e r

1s a g a n In t h e llsr;, the

requesr ;

i s

t o be p r e s s e d , p r o s e c u t l o n w l s n e s s t e t e d

i t w l l l a s s l s t If

t h e c z s e

wn.h:ch

t h e

o r

tne

: :Lestlons

7,:hich

I t

wlsnes

reserved

f o r

F u l l C o u r t b e f o r m u l a t d e n d

prevlous ly

nc t1f ;ed

t o counse l

for

t r e Lefend2s t .

i 6 .

do n o t wlsh

pre-empt my'aeclcloR on

the

reques t ,

' cu t

for

The

a s s i s t a c c e o f The F a r t l e s

I do u l z t e a n y q u e s t l o n

s2y

t n a t I t 1 s u n l l k e l y t h a t

wlll

form-

for

F u l l Court whlc:?

q u e s t l o n

f a c t r a t h e r t h a n

law.

47.

[1983] FCA 298

24 Aug 1983