Austlii High Court of Australia – Banker and customer – Penalty doctrine – Consumer and commercial credit card accounts – Honour fee – Dishonour fee – Late payment fee – Non-payment fee – Over limit fee – Whether those fees penalties – Whether penalty doctrine limited to circumstances where there is breach of contract – Significance of law respecting penal bonds – Grounds for equitable intervention – Whether penalty doctrine now wholly a rule of common law.
Equity – Doctrines and remedies – Relief against penalties – Significance of law respecting penal bonds – Whether relief available only in cases of breach of contract – Whether penalty doctrine now wholly a rule of common law.
Words and phrases – ‘bond’, ‘condition’, ‘dishonour fee’, ‘exception fees’, ‘honour fee’, ‘penalty’.
Judges:
French CJ, Gummow, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell JJ
Citations:
[2012] HCA 30, (2012) 247 CLR 205, (2012) 290 ALR 595, [2012] ASC 155, (2012) 86 ALJR 1002
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Cavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis SC 4-Nov-2015
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Equity, Banking
Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.593106
