Chaudhary, S.I. & Anor v. Ducret, A.R. [1986] FCA 261

27 Var

ss eee re

-

CATCHWORDS Practice and procedure - appeal from interlocutory orders - whether Court erred in law in allowing amendment to particulars to summons - whether amendment created new

charge.

Trade Practices Act 1974 ss.53,79,118,163 Crimes Act 1914 s55s.5,21,21A

Federal Court Rules: 0.13, 0.49

Videon v. Barry Burroughs Pty. Ltd. (1981) 53 F.L.R. 425 XN Gilmour v. Midways Sprinqwood Pty. Ltd. (1980) 49 F.L.R. 36.

SHAHID IOBAL CHAUDHARY and CHAUDHARY'S ORIENTAL CARPET

PALACE PTY. LID. and

ALAN RAYMOND DUCRET

V. Nos. G 295 - 305 of 1985

Northrop, Davies and Jenkinson Jd. 8 July 1986

Melbourne

wee mepeeee ©

ys

a ed

VME eT er

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALTA

J ) VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) V. Nos. G 295-305 ) )

of 1985 GENERAL DIVISION

ON_ APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN

SHAHID IQBAL CHAUDHARY and CHAUDHARY'S ORIENTAL CARPET PALACE PTY. LTD. Appellants

and

ALAN RAYMOND DUCRET Respondent

a

OURT: NORTHROP, DAVIES AND JENKINSON JJ.

to Ho

TEs 8 JULY 1986

CE: MELBOURNE

io

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

NORTHROP J.:

Six informations for offences against paragraph 53(e) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 ("the Act") in which Alan Raymond Ducret ("the prosecutor") is the prosecutor and Chaudhary's Oriental Carpet Palace Pty. Ltd. ("the company") is the defendant are pending in the Federal Court. The informations are brought pursuant to sections 79 and 163 of the Act. One of those informations is based upon an oral representation alleged to have been made on or about 30 April

1983. For the time being this information may be put to one

side. The remaining five informations are based upon

wee eae map nee ee

oe ree ne ee ee ee ee age eee ee ee ee eee ee ee advertisements appearing on various dates and in various newspapers and with respect to various types of carpets. The dates of the' newspapers in which the advertisements appear range between 30 April 1983 and 21 August 1983. With respect to each of these five informations, five other informations for offences based upon 5.5 of the Crimes Act 1914 in which the prosecutor is named as prosecutor and Shahid Iqbal Chaudhary ("the officer") is the defendant are pending in the Federal Court. Summonses were issued with respect to each of these ten informations. Each of these ten prosecutions were commenced within one year after the commission of the alleged offences; see paragraph 21(1)(c) of the Crimes Act. Particulars of the offences alleged were given with respect