Mayo Hardware Pty Ltd and Comptroller-General of Customs

Mayo Hardware Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Comptroller-General of Customs (the respondent) concerning the tariff classification of disposable aluminium trays. The applicant contended that these trays were entitled to admission free of duty under Tariff Concession Order (TCO) 1132500, which required the goods to be classified as "tableware." The respondent had determined that the disposable aluminium trays did not fall within the definition of tableware.

The primary legal issue before Deputy President Rayment QC was whether the disposable aluminium trays, in their ordinary meaning, constituted "tableware" for the purposes of TCO 1132500. This required an interpretation of the term "tableware" in the context of the TCO and its application to the specific goods in question.

Deputy President Rayment QC reasoned that analogies to goods of different compositions, such as ceramic or reusable aluminium trays used for serving purposes on a table, were appropriate for characterising the subject goods under the TCO. He concluded that such items, by their ordinary meaning, are considered "tableware." Applying this reasoning, the Deputy President found that the disposable aluminium trays met the definition of tableware. Consequently, the reviewable decision of the Comptroller-General was set aside. The matter was remitted to the respondent with a direction that the goods were entitled to be admitted free of duty under TCO 1132500.