Grannall v C Geo Kellaway and Sons Pty Ltd [1955] HCA 5

Grannall v C Geo Kellaway and Sons Pty Ltd [1955] HCA 5

There is no ground for concluding that the statutory restriction on agent’s commission impairs the freedom of inter-State trade so as to infringe s. 92. Furthermore, since the essential act of charging the commission was not effected within New South Wales, but rather in Tasmania upon receipt of communication, the offence, if any, did not occur 'within New South Wales' and the information should be dismissed.

Parties
Informant: Brian Francis Grannall, Department of Agriculture, Sydney, New South Wales; Defendant: C. Geo. Kellaway & Sons Proprietary Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Summary Prosecution (information) / Judgment Following Removal to Full Court After Hearing in Court of Petty Sessions
Outcome
Information dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Inter State Trade and Commerce, Statutory Construction, Territorial Application of Criminal Offences, Farm Produce Agency Regulation
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Freedom of Inter State Trade and Commerce Statutory Construction Territorial Application of Criminal Offences Farm Produce Agency Regulation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 40 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Francis Grannall, Department of Agriculture, Sydney, New South Wales

Informant

C. Geo. Kellaway & Sons Proprietary Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Prosecution (information) / Judgment Following Removal to Full Court After Hearing in Court of Petty Sessions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restriction on agent's commission under s. 23(1)(a) and reg. 10 of the Farm Produce Agents Act 1926-1952 (N.S.W.) impairs freedom of inter-State trade protected by s. 92 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged offence of charging excess commission occurred 'within New South Wales' as required by s. 17 of the Interpretation Act 1897 (N.S.W.).

Ratio Decidendi

There is no ground for concluding that the statutory restriction on agent’s commission impairs the freedom of inter-State trade so as to infringe s. 92. Furthermore, since the essential act of charging the commission was not effected within New South Wales, but rather in Tasmania upon receipt of communication, the offence, if any, did not occur 'within New South Wales' and the information should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Information dismissed

Orders

  • Information dismissed
  • Informant to pay the costs of the hearing in the Court of Petty Sessions at Sydney