Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group LimitedCitation:[2016] HCA 28Before:French CJ, Kiefel, Gageler, Keane, Nettle JJDate:27 Jul 2016Case Number:M219/2015, M220/2015Read more
The court held that the late payment fees were not genuine pre-estimates of damage and were out of all proportion to the actual loss suffered. The fees were therefore penalties and unenforceable under contract law.
- Parties
- Appellant: First Appellant; Respondent: Respondent
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 July 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Judgment
- Outcome
- late payment fees found to be penalties and unenforceable
- Legal Topics
- Penalties, Late Payment Fees, Unconscionable Conduct, Unjust Transactions, Unfair Terms
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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Parties
First Appellant
Appellant
Respondent
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether late payment fees imposed by the respondent constitute penalties under contract law
- 2 Whether the fees are extravagant, exorbitant, or unconscionable
- 3 Whether the respondent's legitimate interests are confined to reimbursement of expenses directly occasioned by the appellant's default
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the late payment fees were not genuine pre-estimates of damage and were out of all proportion to the actual loss suffered. The fees were therefore penalties and unenforceable under contract law.
Court Disposition
late payment fees found to be penalties and unenforceable
Orders
- The late payment fees imposed by the respondent are unenforceable as penalties.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment