Barton v Westpac Banking Corporation

[1983] FCA 298

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

13 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 by s ing le Judge

of Federe l Cour t o f a q u e s t i o n for t h e o p i n l o n of a

Fu l l Cour t - c o n s i d e r a t i o n of 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 a 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 :

1. The i n f o r m a t l o n be dlsrnissed.

2. 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 .

' \

'l

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

- NE';{ SOUTH WALE5 DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G 222 of 1982

DIVISION GENERAL 1

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) of

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

On 4 October l a s t a rgumen t took p l ace on the ques t ion

o f whether I 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 It

was agreed be tween counse l rha t If I were t o r e s e r v e a

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 t 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 I 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 a

F u l l Cour t , but t o dlsmiss t h e i n f o r m a t i o n . A gu lde

t o t'ne proper cons t rucr ion of sub-sec .25(6) IS provided ,

i n my op in lon , by the dec i s lon o f rhe E l g h Court i n

Point v . Federal Commissioner of T a x a m (1970) 2 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 ~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

a ~ 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 a d e c l s l o n

of a Board of Reviev$ v tas , ln the te rms of sub-sec .136(3) (2~

i t rhen was) of 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

.. -- -_ .

3.

1 .

"said that the Justlce had refused 8n

application. But, in truth, there could

be no appllcatlon in the proper use of

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 do

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 in

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. In

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

4.

upon by 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 . He

urged upon me 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 by t i e New South Nales Court

of 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 5B of the Crlminal Appeal

Act 1912 (N.S.W.) p r o v i d e d t h a t a 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 as lf lt 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.) 58

i t was h e l d t h a t i t was the dury of a 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 5B of 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 a c a s e 1s a n l n f e r l o r

5.

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 m 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 I 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 of

s.58 o f the Trade P rac t i ces Ac t . I have a l so bo rne

In mlnd t h a t a judge nas power to 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 an inform-

a t l o n s n o u l d be d l smssed ; Hender son v . P ionee r Homes

P t y . L m i t e d (1979) 142 C.L.R. 294. But I h a v e a l s o

taken i r . to account my flrm conclus lon rhex the d e f e n d m t

1s e n t i t l e d t o be acqu i t t ed . Th l s 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 of h l t n e s s e s f r o m

overseas . On one major polnt I have found ega lns t he

de fendan t , t ha t i s o n t h e q u e s t l o n of rnateriallty. I

nave not found i t n e c e s s a r y zo d e a l w l t h I t s defence

based on s.85 o f t he T rade P r2c t i ces Ac t . If i r e s e r v e

a 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 be d e a l t n t h . If l t 1 s s u c c e s s f u l , t h e prosecLtor

w i l l aga ln be wl thout a r l g h t of a-,peal. If It 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 ~ n d on 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 02 t h e q u e s t l o n may7 vdell l e a d

7 .

t o a 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 my c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i t is e n t i t l e d now t o

be acqul t ted , the defendant should nor be burdened .

For a l l t h e s e r e a s o n s I 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 I conclude I 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 a 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 by the Commlsslon, tne

on ly way of 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 by a l l o w m g t h e q u e s t l o n t o

go t o a 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.). No 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 . I 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 by 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 by t h e d e f e n d a n t

of s.58 of 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 IS as f o l l o w s :

"A 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 o 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 1s accepted ."

The ae fenden t 1 s E bznk lcg cc rpora t lon . As zn

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 E 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

It 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 zo 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 m x l a , Chma end o the r

p l a c e s ~n h h a t 1s 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 a 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 on 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

a 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.

A p e r s o n c a h r g th;s t 3 w would be 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 be s p e n t In ove rn lgh t

c rave1 from Singapore t o A u s t r a l i a . On 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 more f u l i y t o 'ce c e s c r l b e d a

Xrs. Spz i r s In Augus t 1561, throush a 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 on the Fr iday evenlng 19 February , 1982.

She was t h u s a w a y , n o t f o r 16 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

is t n a t w l t h l n t h e rneenlng of 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 by Nrs. S p e l r s , r-t a t m e

supplq’ a 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

s a l d t o be i n t h e r e d u c t l o n of t h e t l n e 3f t h e t o u r

t o whlch There is no I 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

or tha t Mrs. S p e l r s t r e v e l l e d n o n e on 19 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 to sursply a s e r v i c e ,

i . e . a 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 t of kh lch the peynent was a c c e p t e d ;

( 5 )	If
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 S e 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 of %.le d e f e r c e s

provldea f o r s.E5 of 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 of wnetker e 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 1s

whether , i f rh2 t be 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 rc 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 a

d e $ a l l e i r e v l e w of 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

ES 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 by Ca thay Pec l f l c or IvIelayslan

Ai r l lne Sys t ems . A t ell m e t e r i a l times ,encas hed

a 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

a: 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 on 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 by 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 .

5.

Since It was a 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 on ;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
on	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 to

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 by Czthay PEclfLc 2nd ti le defendant to 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 to

on 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 of the marke t ing sec t lon ana a 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 on bena l f o f

the defendant t o a Mr. were made by Mr. E a l l y . He 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 . t xanager a t tscned to ,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 w l tn 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 an Amer icen t ou r s company. M r . P l a s t e r

1s s t a t l o n e d I n S a h r a l n a n d 1s Q z n t a s ' s a l e s

manager f o r t he K lCd le Eas t Bo . th 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 of 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 by

t h e d e f e r d e n t but; by 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 on L F ~ m 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 h m by W-.

B e l l y a n d a l s o a l e t t e r k h r c h Mr. E e i l y hzd wr l t t en .

He 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
..

CO o- ,e rz te to 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 on lc 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

18 Apr i l , 1981, TO t h e

l a s t depa r tu re on 27 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 1C

A~rl l , 1 9 8 2 . T h e r e w e r e o n l y f l v e n e n r n s z f t e r

31 December, 1381, a n c o n l y t h r e e a f t e r 31 Janue ry ,

1982. Accordmg to 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 or 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 5e

allo?.red t o t r s v e l on ;F2 on 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 It was n o t p o s s i b l e t o a l l o w t h l s seyond

31 January, 1982. He though t ne re mgh nave t been

some discussion akout welt h s t l n g t h e p a s s e n g e r s on

the r e t u r n s t o t a k e p l a c e a f t e r 31 Janua ry , 1982,

o u t h i s r e c o l l e c t l o n was vague. He 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 of o t h e r o p e r a t o r s as

z

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 more 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 In 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 of 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. He 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 of 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 he foun-l It 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 I 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 I am zwar-e, thkre wes no a t t empt

t o walt 1lst.I' He s a l d he hed no 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 2 beyond

31 J a n u s r y , L982. He s a l d t h a t n e h e l d o k t no hope

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

Accordx ,c to 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

9.

m.

t o Mr. P l e i s t e r a h o s t s n a d s ~ l y bzsls . rne

l a p r e s s l o n I 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 to Mr. F l a l s t e r a b o u t

t n l s problern. They had nany matters to 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. Cf 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!'. :e 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 on

t h e W 2 flight f o r t he cu ra t lo r ! ;f t h e p r o g r s m e and

~t xoula be , of 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 no 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 a d a t e

"but I d l d n o t a b l d e by l t

because I sa ld the prcgranme had beer! brochures x d

was 1n f ac r . due to ope ra t e th rougk to tne end of 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" .

L

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 of 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 of 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 is

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 no pro5lerr.

a b o ~ t r e t u r n s up t c t h e ent of 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 m 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

1s t n a t t h e r e was no 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

of 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 ER o n g o n g a t t e m p t , a i t n o - s n so f a r a s ne ..vas

11.

.

per sona l ly conce rned I t czme to an end by Ser,te-?ber

LSSl, t3 accom?oc2;@ passenze r s on [;F2 or, Sa tu rday

In respecr ; of 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 by t h e e v l d e n c e of two o tner pg l tnesses and

documents kepr; by 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 o f e a c h o f 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 on x c a l r l : r ec , t?vo r e s e r v a t l o n s an

on 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; by ,,anteS. I b l r s .

enployed by m e d e f e r d s n t , h a i 8

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 In respect of 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 be 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 I c m

read t'nem they Ere In conformity .trlzh Xrs. Crouche r ' s

no ta t lons wn lch I z r o s o s e t o u s e a s 2 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

I 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

In 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 to l eave S lngapc re on Satu-day, 25 Zuly,

15231. The r e t u r n was a c t u a l l y maae 3n ' 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 U?

t o and lnc lud?ng Sa ta-day , 14 ?<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

on 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; no

13.

.

.

question of walt i l s t l n g WES Idvoived . Af te r

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. 2 f l l g h t l e a v x g S m g a p o r e or, 25

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 on t h e

SF2 on 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 , by 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 26 Dece rbs r depa r tu re Mrs.

sho-u,s thar; the pessengers were

booked on f l l g h t :F96 buc were w a l t l l s z e c OE GF2,

p re sumab ly fo r t he Sa t c rday . Aga ln 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 23 Janua ry c ros sed ou t 2nd 22 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 on F r l d a y ,

22 January , and no t Sa turday , 23 J m u a r y , is con-

firmed by o t h e r e v l d e n c e t o x h l c h I s h a l l l a t e r

r e f e r . Krs. Cree l s noza t lon on 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 2C F e b r u a r y t o

19 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 on 2& June , 1981, when z number

of 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 on 2C March

nas above 1~ I n r e d m e 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 ~ E l n c l c z t e s K

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 on 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 on 10

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

KK I n e z 2 4 / 6 " . Tne symbol KK s t a n d s f o r c o c f l r m e d .

Thus on 24 J u n e , 1981, Krs. Cree conflrmea . ! ~ tn

Mrs. Crouche r tha t pas senge r s l eav lng Singapore

m 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 I h a v e r e f e r r e d ls,

t o e 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 of

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 ~t 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 31 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 to

>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 zo 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! 26 > e c e x e r ,

1981, 9 J a c u e r y , 193, 23 January, 1Se2,

20 February, r e t u r n s d u e 1982 and 2C Ferck , 1982 . 3u t t ne

CO 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 on 2F96. There 1s s m e eoc:bt z5out t h e

r e t u r n & e 50 l e a v e Singapore on ?C 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 1s in 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

of tne comFhln ts which were nade X 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 oc

23 January and 2G Tebruary, l982.

. I should say o f bo th Nrs. Cree 2nd Mrs. Croucher

t h a t h e y i m p r e s s e d me 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

a 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 no

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.

It 1s 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 . I

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 . I neve no t u rned my

m-nd to That .ues t lon . In :he Ilr-;nt of t k e c3nmcn

. .

ground wnich there 1 s cetween c s m c e l akour: The

m a t t e r I do n o t f l n a lt n e c e s s a r y t o do so.

Mrs. S p e l r s had 2 co7y of t he 'x-ochure. On

17 August, 19e1, she paia a 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 , On 18 August, 1981, her booklng was

t h e l e z t e r t o he r from Century Flaza

m

r r a v e l of 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 lr r e s p e c t

of a Holiday 526l t o u r , " S a t u r d a y , 6 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 :n 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	on	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

so 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

on Fr ldzy , 19 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 on 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 en i t l c e r a r y

were sent to Cenzury FlazE Travel on or ?bout 15

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 t3 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 , an 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 by 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, tc 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 , 2C 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 on or

E5out 22 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 , lf i t were not she would receive a 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 no 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 ; ~ zo Cent’vy Plaza

fo r t he lnconven le rce caused by 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 , m e d e f e r d z n t w r o t e b o t h

22.

.

t	o
Cen a p o l o g l s i n g f o r 1Ahnat tu ry P laza Trave l and to !<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 a 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 " . An ex g r e t l a payment cf 5100 was

made. I t should be obse rved In pas s lng t h a t e l though ,

m a 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 %e p-ob1e.n was

caused by 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 In

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. If I t had cccurred

a t a 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 on 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 he 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 a 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 I k v e r e c o c n t e d t n i s c c u l d .1ave

been dore , If necessa ry on a ~ 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 on F r lday , 19 Fecrua ry , 1282,

2L June , 1291.

Furzher o u t of a cornT1alr.t made by the Consuner ev ldence to whlch I 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?.; j laln?s fron two 3Essengers Sooked on

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 . ;t 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 02 t h e n e e d t o r e t d r n a 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

I e a r l i e r s a l d tha t I 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. He

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 of tne problem. The 1n ;u l r l e s he

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 on 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 no 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

te rms of 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 of

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 a Fr. Holloway .,h0 was

I n the employ of the defendar.t . I 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 QO n o t f l n d i t

necessa ry CO 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 to have been

a t a l l u p s e t by 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 . If

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 1s 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 E: a n e a r h e r s t a g e b u t thls r a y

have been more ' cecaue che te rmnatcr f11rht no

longer went t o Xelbourne ra ther than because of any

s h o r t e n l n g of t h e t o u r I tself 3r t k e s t 2 y lr? Slngapore.

IvIrs . Cree W E S :oncernea a'ccut i t 2nd i lerself enceav-

oured CO do s o m e t h m g c c r e s t o r e t h e p o s l t l o n . Tv40

pessengers on 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 o f

f a c t . They a r e :

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

.

2. By 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 o n m e 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 In 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 . I am 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 I 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 tz l e e v e

Slngapore on Saturday, 9 JaRuary, 1082. The passengers

b e r e booked on ;F96 b c c b a i t l l s t e d on CF2.

3. On 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.

4. 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 CG l e z v e OR F r l d a y ,

22 Januery an< passengers were never 13 F e z r u a r y r e s p e c t l v e l y . m. ,ne

walt l l s t e d er! GF2 to a e p r t

on tne Sa tu rday .

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

tne depa r tu re schedu led tc i eave S lngapore on Sa tu rday ,

20 March, 1982. I t is unnecesszry to d3 se .

27.

6. d t n o u g h Mr. Plaster gave h l s evidence

h o n e s t l y , i do 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 of '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! on tne Sa turaay on

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

1s 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 In m e s e

r e s p e c t s .

7. 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 ; of

a l l t o u r s . BLT; I zm 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 . I ;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 E 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 so

~ 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. As 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 to 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 .

8. 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 to leave Slnga?ore

on Sz turday , d e p a r t on F r i d a y , 20 February , 1982, was r e s c h e c L l e d t o

19 Februery, 1982. Thet cnenge '>,as

nede on 24 June , 19S.1. There tke mat te s tood . r Tne

fec t t k t 13s zhange n ~ d beer-- x d e -*vas k n o w $0 Mrs.

Croucher and to 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 t

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 It ought to heve been.

9. The defendenr; d l a no t no t l fy any o f I t s a g e n t s of

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 a t l c k e t e n t l t l l n g I~lrs. S p e i r s tc

on SF96 d e p a r t i n g Singapore on

? 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 of s . 5 8 , a 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 h e i n

fac t h26. I 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 1s en 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 :S COFE t c a c s n c l n s l s c , cc 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 ES 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. On 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. On zhe

o ther hand a t r ave l egen t , ? r e sumab ly exFer l encea

~n zhe lnduscry If one nas r ega rd to tne number

of 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 EO 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 on 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 na one has to ? lake

a essessmen' of ztie Obviousljr a slruzt:on 2s c e s t o z e c a .

q u e s t l o n of degree 1s Involved and 2n

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

offence which 1s cnarged and aust be proved beyond

reasonable doubt .

Hav lng r e f l ec t ea on the me t t e r I 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 . If 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 I j l 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 of 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

m days and n lghts . Those who formula tec he

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

24 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 a l l t t l e n o r e .

Furthermore, a 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 by 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 x e day was o r was n o t ma's?r:al.

Tc 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 by 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 In

w a t 1s r ecogn l sed as one of the a t t r a c t l v e

shopping p l a c e s In 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 a different

one. The reasons all1 Se many a n 6 v a r l s a sca t he

lmpact of 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 In a l l the c l r c u m s t a r z e s I

nave a 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 m 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 TO 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 . a gul1r;y mlnd

on m e p a r t o f t h e d e f e n c z n t . I 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! a 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 V o f m e Act. The on ly one o f 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 V.

S u l l y (1281) 36 x.L.R. 371, a d e c l s l o n of a 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

a 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

E p r o s e c u t l o n t o p r c v e a 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 ;f 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 %e 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 cy 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

be 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 a c o n t r a v e n t l c n c. l a 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 a ' c o n v 1 c t l o z ' .

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

of 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 V sf

ro a s $ l l c y on t k e ?ar t of t n e

l e g l s l a t u r e c h a t lr 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 , LE

The case o f s . 5 5 ( e ) , I t 1s unnecessa ry to

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 of defer ices

i n s.85 1 s wlde - reasonable mis take ; reason-

a b l e r e h a m e on in fo rme t ion s u p p l l e d 'cy

ano the r ; con t r even t lon due to 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 of 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 2 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 a

gane ra l excu lpa to ry r;ower where a ? e r s o n o t h e r

zhap e body corpore te has ac ted hones t ly 2 ~ d

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 of 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 m

any even t uzon e s t ac l l sh ing nens r ea . Rzzne r ,

i t a s s ~ m s e 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

by 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 . l'

A ques t lc r . arlses as r;o whether I 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 m of fence w!nck p l a l c l y l n v o l v e s

a rnentel element In That It 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

by 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.

.

L

prov ldes . If 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

It 1s n e c e s s a r y , If t h e p r o s e c u t l o n 1s

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 by one or 30”e of I t s

s e r v a n t s or 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 a 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 It 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 more t h a r ! t n a t , a t t k e r m e t n e money

was aczeprea , the Zefendanz , ty 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 a 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 of

o f t h e money, t o p r o v l d e a 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 0: 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 m 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 on 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 a 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 a 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 .

G. 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 t ha t che

de a c c e p t e s for somctnlng :uhlch fencmz d ld Ro t ca re 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 .

I t n l n k t h e s e v a r i c u s hzys 3f 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 of 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 1s

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

t o the gravamen of 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: is proved beyond reasonEcle doubt that

one or more 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 a 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 ce 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 of 5rrl:ners J .

I n ._ Aearaon v. r<orle> f o r a ? ty . L iml tec ( 1 ? & C ) 33

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

of	a	corpora t -on .
It f c l l o w s t h a t It IS 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 , 8s 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 , ro 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 1s 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 3e a 13 day tou r ,

accepted tne cusrover ' s noney knowlng It w2s paid

for a 14 day tour . Ctherwlse t h e c o r p c r i u o n 1s

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 a 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 ,

lt must be showr. to keve beer. n

e 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 CO xhe c x e s t l o n o f

v,hetner <./het was t o be supsi leci :;0~16 :e 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 ~ u c h 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 a c u s r c m e r ' s money, if m e 5oes nor

a p F r e c l a t e ,tmzt ~t 1s 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 be 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 14

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 a 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 am u z a c l e

t o say. Lndoubtedly It l e d LO t n e n a x m g oy

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 9

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 - I 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 of t h e d e f e n d c n t , m y one sf taem,

L

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 13 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 of p r x f r e r e o n e b e l a c c e o f p r o t a i l l l s i e s ,

. one mlgh t conc lude tha t an mfe rence shou ld ce 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

-

OR t n s r a t t e r , I e7 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

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 c i

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 a 14 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 e t o u r . T h c t 1s 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 ln re l t i t ion t,? t h e d a t e

of d e p a r t u r e f rom Singapore.

rn

, k e t c z a l i t y of 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 on t h e p a r t of

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 by I t s failure t o

? laze Trave l of 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 ne

- .

could averccve The 7 r c - s : w . To a 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 a proble-n In 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. I am

would be t h e f lrst c3 copcede That he

should nave seen to it tha t ager . t s were notifies

so 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 of 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 so 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

a 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 be e s t a b l l s h e d l n r,hls wzy. I

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; or

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 of 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 . I 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

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

I t was s a l d by 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 I b e l l e v e It .

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 ?G 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 :a 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 my 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 1s 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 of t he o f f e n c e

i s LO InZen5 XI supply somexclng rnaterlall . ; c1fferer. t

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, 1s e ' rsent

:h15 c a s e .

My 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 of s,85 of

the Act . bench tney r a s e . I 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 of i t s s e r v a n t s 3r

a g e c t s . I 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 . s 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 I 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 be clzalssea. Xowevsr,

s e x o r cour se1 For The p rosecsc lon ES zsked me, IÎ

tha t should be my 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 my 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 a 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 oy

a Fcll Courr; pu r suan t TO 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 a 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 of s .58 o f t h e Act

I n t n e c c c t e x t of 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 . 1s srrongly oppTsed by t h e

The r eason for the r e q u e s t 1 s t n a t lf I =1 = 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 , my Judg-

merit m o u n r l n g t o 2n E c s u l t t a l o f t ne de fendan t on a

-

c r l n l c a l c h a r g e ; r h o m s o n v . 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 v.

Davld Syme 5. Co. (1382) &G .:..L.R.519 a t 3p.520-521.

I d l d n o t say h h a t v1el.v of $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 my 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 . I 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 . I

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 a 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

i 6 .

do n o t wlsh TO 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 I wlll form-

for a F u l l Court whlc:? is a

q u e s t l o n of f a c t r a t h e r t h a n of law.

47.