CONSUMER LAW - whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant contravened s 29(1) of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth) by engaging in credit activity within the meaning of s 6(1) of the National Credit Act when selling second-hand vehicles by way of a book-up without holding a licence to engage in that credit activity - whether the purchase of second-hand motor vehicles under the appellant's book-up system fell within the terms of s 11 of the National Credit Code (contained in Schedule 1 of the National Credit Act) - whether there was a charge for the appellant's provision of credit within s 5(1)(c) of the National Credit Code
CONSUMER LAW - whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant had contravened s 12CB(1) of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) in that, in connection with the supply of financial services to customers, the appellant engaged in a system of conduct or pattern of behaviour which was unconscionable - whether the appellant's conduct was unconscionable within the meaning of s 12CC(1) of the ASIC Act - where customers are indigenous residents of the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands (APY Lands), and in most cases, have very limited or no assets, limited net income and low levels of financial literacy - where the book-up system is neither recent nor unique - where the book-up system has advantages to customers in terms of alleviating the disadvantages associated with demand sharing and "boom and bust" expenditure - where no undue influence or exerted undue influence - where no dishonest use of debit cards or personal identification numbers (PINs) - where no dishonest maintenance of records by the appellant - where customers have low levels of financial literacy, but basic understanding of the book-up system - where customers voluntarily enter into the book-up arrangements - where customers understand the basic elements of the book-up arrangements - where conduct is not predatory in the relevant sense
CONSUMER LAW - whether the primary judge erred in granting an injunction against the appellant under s 12GD(1) of the ASIC Act
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - whether the orders made by the primary judge ought to be set aside - whether an order by the primary judge that the Amended Originating Application brought by the respondent ought to be dismissed
↧