New South Wales Hire‐Purchase Legislation*
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1962.tb02225.x |
| Date | 01 November 1962 |
| Published date | 01 November 1962 |
NEW
SOUTH
WALES HIRE-PURCHASE
LEGISLATION
*
To
THOBE
interested
in
hire-purchase legislation and the problem8
it seeks to solve, the New South Wales Hire-Purchase Act,
1960,'
prove of great interest for several
reasons.
First, the Act
is
based
on
the uniform Hire-Purchase
Bill
*
which
was
adopted
at a
conference
of
Australian state and federal
0fRcials
in
1959
*
and has
now been enacted by Queensland,' Victoria,s Tasmanias
and
Western Australia,' in addition to New South
Wales.
Secondly,
New South Wales has
a
distinguished record in the field of
hire-
purchase legislation, and until the adoption
of
the
uniform
Bill
its
legislation was perhaps more comprehensives than that
of
any
other English-speaking jurisdiction which follows the hire-purchaa
method of financing instalment sales.
Thirdly,
the new
Act
*
This article wan written before the
Final
Report
of the
(Molony)
Committee
on
1
Act
No.
99,
1960.
Date of commacement
proclaimed
as
1/6/60
(0.d.
N?
73,
The
debates
on
the
Bill
(hereafter referred
to
an
laS0
39th Parliament, 2nd Session
(1959-60):
No.
55.
March
99.
1960,
p.
8891
et
aeq.
(L.A.,
let
R.):
No.
60,
April
7, 1960,
p.
8866
et seq.
(L.A., 2nd
R.);
No.
61,
April
12, 1960,
p.
3951
et
seq.
(L.C., 2nd
R.).
The.1967
Debates
on
the Hire-Purchase Agreements (Amendment) Act.
1967,
to
wkch
reference
will
be made
in
subsequent footnotes, will be found in the followin reports:
1966-57,
38th Parliament, 2nd
Session,
No.
77,
April
2,
1967,
p.
4hO
et
se
(L.A.,
1st
R.):
No.
82,
April
11, 1967,
4699
et
8e
.
(L.A., 2nd
R.);
No.
d;
April
17, 1967,
p.
4856
et
seq.
(2nd
k.
(continue!) and Committee
eta
\;
No.
83,
April
17, 1967,
p.
4870
et
seq.
(L.C.,
1st
R.);
No.
89,
April
17,
I&,
p.
4901
et
seq.
(L.C., 2nd
R.).
It is interesting
to
note
that whilst the primary pu
ne
of
the Canadian
Uniform Conditional
Sales
Act (originally drafted in
1X-d
mvieed in
1947
and
1966)
was
to
facilitate commercial intercourse between
!he
provinces, the
aim
of
the Australian Bill is
(a)
to
solve
the problem of interstate
a
ee-
ments," and (b) to secure proper economic control over the volume of
Ere-
purchase :redit.
Cf.
the
writer
's
Uniformit of Legislation in Canad-the Conditional Sales
Experience"
(1961)
i9
C an.Bar Rev.
165.
The first roblem ap
m
to
be
rliar to Australia.
It
was found, for example, t%at
nome
gw
South
ales finance companies were subjecting
their
agreements to
the
law
of
South Australia in order
to
avoid the
more
onerous
New
South
Wales
legis-
lation, constitutional dif6culties
a
parent1 preventing the individual statos
from euccesafully outlawing such cfoicemdw clauses.
4
Hire-Purchslle Aot,
1959.
(Actn
of
the Parliament
of
Queenslmd,
1W9-60,
Act
No.
99.)
See
also
(1960)
13
Austr.Canvey.
44.
Hire-Purchase
Act,
1969.
(The
Acts of the Parliament of Victoria,
1959,
Act
Np.
Wl.)
are-Purchare Act,
1959.
(The
Acts of
the
Parliament of
Tarmania,
1N9,
Act
No.
79.)
7
Him-Purchane
Act,
1959.
(The
Statutes
of
Western
Australia,
lW,
A&
No.
68.)
6
Cf.
1860
Debates, p.
3975.
Consumer hotection
:
Cmnd.
1781.
1877).
g$?:z,r
mll
.
be found
in
the
New
8outh
Wales Parliamentary
Debater,
2
1960
Debates, p.
3866.
See
1980
Debates, pp.
8678, 8891,
8866,
8958.
687
To continue reading
Request your trial