Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 4 July 1906
Page: 1038


Mr ISAACS (Indi) (Attorney-General) . - If a foreign or Commonwealth corporation makes a contract intended to be in restraint of trade or commerce, tothe detriment of the public, we say, first of all. that there may be a prosecution; but where evidence- sufficient to justify a prosecution cannot be obtained, we allow one of the parties to say, " We admit that this contract was made with intent to injure the public, and we shall not be bound by it." Why should the other party under such circumstances be able to say, " You must be bound by it. Until I am prosecuted and condemned by Judge and jury I insist that you shall carry out the contract." Why should we not allow either party, if it repents, to say, "We shall not go on with the contract," instead of putting the Commonwealth to the vast expense of a prosecution? Surely if the contract, is improper, and the bargain nefarious, we should give either party the right to saythat thev will not carry it out.


Mr DUGALD THOMSON (NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES) - A Judge will be brought into the matter in any case.


Mr ISAACS - Only if the other party dares to question the right to withdraw. The shortest way of putting an end toillegal bargains is to say to the parties to them, " You are not bound by them." It seems to me that this arrangement would* save a good deal of bother and expense.







Suggest corrections