Dillon, D.D. v Chin, L.L. & Anor [1988] FCA 440

Dillon, D.D. v Chin, L.L. & Anor [1988] FCA 440

Separate false representations made by a defendant generally constitute separate contraventions under s.53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974, unless they form a single compendious representation on one occasion; the rule against duplicity applies to such charges. A natural person who is the chief actor in, and knowingly concerned in, the contravention by a corporation can be found criminally liable under s.5(1) of the Crimes Act or s.79(1)(d) of the Trade Practices Act.

Parties
Prosecutor: Danelle Dobinson Dillon; Defendant: Luke Lawrence Chin; Defendant: Kingly Commodities (Qld) Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 1988
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution / Judgment and Orders After Hearing
Outcome
Convictions and adjournments on multiple charges, one dismissal; orders for amendment and costs.
Legal Topics
Duplicity in Charges, Trade Practices Act S.53(c), Knowledge of Contravention, Prosecution of Corporations and Individuals
Criminal Law Trade Practices Duplicity in Charges Trade Practices Act S.53(c) Knowledge of Contravention Prosecution of Corporations and Individuals

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Danelle Dobinson Dillon

Prosecutor

Luke Lawrence Chin

Defendant

Kingly Commodities (Qld) Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution / Judgment and Orders After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether charges are bad for duplicity when more than one representation is alleged
  2. 2 Whether statements made on one occasion may constitute a single offence under s.53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  3. 3 Application of the 'single enterprise' doctrine to representation offences

Ratio Decidendi

Separate false representations made by a defendant generally constitute separate contraventions under s.53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974, unless they form a single compendious representation on one occasion; the rule against duplicity applies to such charges. A natural person who is the chief actor in, and knowingly concerned in, the contravention by a corporation can be found criminally liable under s.5(1) of the Crimes Act or s.79(1)(d) of the Trade Practices Act.

Court Disposition

Convictions and adjournments on multiple charges, one dismissal; orders for amendment and costs.

Orders

  • G57/87: Matter adjourned to allow amendment to charge one offence only; adjourned to Registrar; defendant to pay costs.
  • G58/87: Defendant convicted of contravention of s.53(c) Trade Practices Act 1974; adjourned to Registrar; defendant to pay costs.