Doherty, A.P. v Traveland Pty Ltd - [1981] FCA 231

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	)	W.A. NO. 34-39 Of 1980
)

GENERAL

DIVISION

)

40-45

W.A.

Of 1980

I	B E T W E E N :
ANTHONY PAUL DOHERTY

Prosecutor

- and -

TRAVELAND PTY. LIMITED

Defendant

AND

ANTHONY PAUL DOHERTY

Prosecutor

- and -

ASSOCIATED TRAVEL

PTY. LTD.

Defendant

O R D E R S

JUDGE MAKING ORDERS	Fisher J.
WHERE MADE	Adelaide
DATE OF ORDERS	9 December 1981

THE COURT ORDERS	THAT LEAVE BE G m E D	TO MAKE	THE FOLLOWING
AMENDMENTS:

In respect of matter

No. W.A. G34 of. 1980 -

1. In the information for an offence (a) the words "and displayed" in the 15th line be deleted.

(b) the words

"11 days duration" in the 17th line be deleted

and in lieu thereof the words "less than 13 days

duration" be inserted.

- "These proceedings

are instituted with the consent in writing

of the

Minister pursuant to section 163(4)(b) of the said

Act".

2. In the

summons

(a) the words "and displayed" in the 14th line be deleted

(b) the words

"11 days duration" in the 16th line be

deleted and in lieu thereof the words "less than 13	days
duration" be inserted.

(i) deleting the figure "1" in the 2nd line

(ii) deletlng the figure "2" and the words "The Prosecutor alleges" in the 11th line and in lieu thereof inserting at the beginning of the next

line the bracketed letter

"d"

(iii) deleting the words

"11 days duration" in the

21st line and in lleu thereof inserting the

words "less than 13 days duration"

(d) the following paragraph be added

- "These proceedings

are instituted with the consent in writing of the

Minister pursuant to section 163(4)(b) of the Said

Act".

In respect of matter

No. W.A. G35 of

1980 -

1. In the information for an offence

( a ) -the words "and displayed" in the 15th line be deleted

(b) the words

"11 days duration" in the 17th line be deletec

and in*lieu thereof the words "less than 13 days

duration" be inserted

are instituted with the consent in writing of the

- "These proceedings

Minister pursuant to- section 163(4)

(b)

2..

In the summons

(a) the words "and displayed" in the 14th line

be deleted

(b) the words

"11 days duration" in the 16th line be deletec

and in lieu thereof the words "less than 13 days

duration" be inserted.

the charge be amended by

(i) deleting the figure "1" in the 2nd line

(ii) deleting the figure "2" and the words

- "The

prosecutor alleges". in the 9th line and in

lieu thereof inserting at the beginning of the

next line the bracketed letter "d"

(iii) deleting the words

"11 days duration" in the

19th line and in lieu…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Doherty, A.P. v Traveland Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1981] FCA 231
Decision Date: 9 Dec 1981

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Doherty v Traveland Pty Ltd, heard in the Federal Court of Australia, involved multiple proceedings against Traveland Pty. Limited and Associated Travel Pty. Ltd. for alleged breaches of the Trade Practices Act 1974. The proceedings were initiated following consent from the Minister, but the prosecutor sought leave to amend the information and summons to better align with the Minister's consent and to correct factual inaccuracies regarding the duration of tours advertised. The defendants argued that the amendments would be fatal, depriving the court of jurisdiction and causing injustice.

The court examined whether the departures from the Minister's consent were substantial enough to invalidate the proceedings or whether they could be amended without causing injustice to the defendants. The court held that the amendments sought did not alter the nature of the offences charged, nor did they deprive the defendants of any legal protections. The court found that the Minister's consent sufficiently identified the offences, and the information and summons correctly charged these offences under the statute. The court also held that the omission of certain words relating to the promotion of services did not render the information defective, as the essence of the offence was clearly indicated.

Therefore, the court granted leave to amend the information and summons as sought by the prosecutor. The court ordered that amended documents be filed and reserved the question of costs for later determination.

Orders