Steiner, J.R. & Anor v. Magic Carpet Tours Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 297

Steiner, J.R. & Anor v. Magic Carpet Tours Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 297

The evidence established that firm arrangements for transport and accommodation were made with Mandala Bungalows; therefore, the representations by Magic Carpet Tours were not misleading or deceptive under s 52(1).

Parties
First Appellant: John Raymond Steiner; Second Appellant: Lynne Janine Steiner; First Respondent: Magic Carpet Tours Pty. Limited; Second Respondent: Easts Holidays Pty. Limited; Third Respondent: Valerie Jean Ireland; Cross Claimant: Easts Holidays Pty. Limited; First Cross Respondent: Magic Carpet Tours Pty. Limited; Second Cross Respondent: Valerie Jean Ireland
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 1985
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Holiday Travel Arrangements
Trade Practices Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Holiday Travel Arrangements

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Raymond Steiner

First Appellant

Lynne Janine Steiner

Second Appellant

Magic Carpet Tours Pty. Limited

First Respondent

Easts Holidays Pty. Limited

Second Respondent

Valerie Jean Ireland

Third Respondent

Easts Holidays Pty. Limited

Cross Claimant

Magic Carpet Tours Pty. Limited

First Cross Respondent

Valerie Jean Ireland

Second Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents made false representations about transport and accommodation arrangements under Trade Practices Act 1974, sub-s. 52(1).

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established that firm arrangements for transport and accommodation were made with Mandala Bungalows; therefore, the representations by Magic Carpet Tours were not misleading or deceptive under s 52(1).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Appellants to pay respondents' costs.