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
Thursday, 9 March 1972
Page: 623

Senator CAVANAGH (South Australia) - I am not satisfied with that position. I agree with the remarks of the AttorneyGeneral that it may not be necessary to serve a notice on the bank and that one need not go to the expense of doing so. But I think it is only right that a bank should know that I am making an application to the court for the right to inspect its books. Therefore, out of courtesy I would desire to serve the bank. The AttorneyGeneral concluded his remarks by saying that 1 would be prohibited from serving such a notice. If the question involved is that, to save the expense of an applicant, the bank need not be served why do we not say so? Why do we not say a bank need' not be served instead of 'shall' not be served. That is ridiculous.

Suggest corrections