Moran and Cato Pty Ltd v Cantlon

The appeal concerned Moran & Cato Pty Ltd, the appellants, and Joseph Adam Cantlon, the respondent. The dispute arose from an information laid by Cantlon alleging that Moran & Cato, a retail grocer, had issued trading stamps to him contrary to the *Trading Stamps Act 1901* (Vic.). The coupons in question were contained within packets of starch manufactured by W. H. Burford & Sons Ltd. and promised that upon presentation of a specified number of coupons to the manufacturer's agents, certain goods would be provided. The High Court of Australia heard the appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria, which had overturned a dismissal by the Court of Petty Sessions.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the retail grocer, Moran & Cato, in distributing coupons provided by the manufacturer W. H. Burford & Sons Ltd. with the sale of their starch, was "issuing trading stamps" within the meaning of section 3 of the *Trading Stamps Act 1901*. This required the Court to interpret the definitions of "trader" and "trading stamp" as provided in section 2 of the Act, particularly the distinction between a "trader" issuing stamps and a "trading stamp company" supplying them, and the nature of the promise made by the issuer.

Griffith C.J. and Powers J. held that the appeal should succeed. They reasoned that the coupons, as originally issued by W. H. Burford & Sons Ltd., were not trading stamps because they were redeemable by the manufacturer or its agents, and thus did not fall within the definition of a trading stamp which entitles the holder to demand goods from a person *other than* the original issuer. They further held that Moran & Cato, by merely distributing these coupons as part of the sale of the manufacturer's goods, did not "issue" them in the sense contemplated by the Act. The term "issue" was interpreted to mean making a promise on one's own behalf, not merely passing on a document containing a promise made by another. Isaacs J., dissenting, argued that the plain language of the Act prohibited any trader from giving a trading stamp to a customer on the sale of goods, and that Moran & Cato's act of handing over the coupons with the starch constituted an "issue" within the ordinary meaning of the word, thereby rendering the entire scheme of the Act nugatory if interpreted otherwise.

The High Court, by majority, allowed the appeal. The order nisi to review the decision of the Court of Petty Sessions was discharged, and the order of the Supreme Court of Victoria was reversed. Moran & Cato Pty Ltd. were to pay the costs of the appeal.