Pac-Rim Printing Pty Ltd v Australian Postal Corp [2000] FCA 475
The article was not a "leaflet" within s 30(1)(c) because, although physically capable of being described as a folded printed sheet, its substance was a personal communication arising out of a pre-existing relationship with Golden Casket Winners Circle cardholders, and that relationship was recalled in and relevant...
Source-derived case information.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 April 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court Granting a Declaration of Contravention of S 29 of the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (cth)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['meaning of "leaflet"' 'reserved Postal Services' 'carriage and Delivery of Letters' 'exceptions Under S 30(1)(c) of the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (cth)']
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court Granting a Declaration of Contravention of S 29 of the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (cth)
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the article delivered by the appellant was a "leaflet" within the meaning of s 30(1)(c) of the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (Cth).' 'Whether the article fell outside the services reserved to Australia Post under s 29 of the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (Cth).']
Ratio Decidendi
The article was not a "leaflet" within s 30(1)(c) because, although physically capable of being described as a folded printed sheet, its substance was a personal communication arising out of a pre-existing relationship with Golden Casket Winners Circle cardholders, and that relationship was recalled in and relevant to the communication. It therefore remained within the reserved services and the declaration granted by Weinberg J was correct.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, including any reserved costs."]
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