Rochfort v Trade Practices Commission

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Rochfort against a decision of the Trade Practices Commission. The dispute concerned the Commission's power to require a person to attend before it and give evidence and produce documents under section 155 of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth). Rochfort had been issued with a notice under this section, requiring him to attend and produce documents relating to his business activities.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the notice issued by the Trade Practices Commission was valid. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether the Commission had reasonable grounds to believe that Rochfort had committed or might have committed an offence against the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth), as required by section 155(1) for the issuance of such a notice. The Court also considered whether the notice was too broad in its scope, demanding production of documents that were not sufficiently related to the suspected contravention.

The Court reasoned that section 155(1) requires the Commission to have a genuine belief, based on reasonable grounds, that a contravention has occurred or may occur. This belief must be objectively justifiable. The Court found that the information before the Commission at the time the notice was issued did not provide reasonable grounds for the belief that Rochfort had committed or might have committed an offence. The notice was therefore held to be invalid. The Court also noted that even if reasonable grounds existed, a notice must be sufficiently specific in its requirements to avoid being characterised as a "fishing expedition".

The appeal was allowed, and the notice issued by the Trade Practices Commission was set aside.