Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v World Netsafe Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1827

Original Word Document (122.5 KB)

2000FCA1827 - Corrigendum

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v World Netsafe Pty Ltd & Anor [2000] FCA 1827

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976, s 21

Trade Practices Act 1974, ss 52, 53AA, 53(c), 53(d), 57, 58, 59, 61, 80, 80A, 83, 87(1)(B)

AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION V WORLD NETSAFE PTY LTD AND TERENCE BUTLER

Q 297 of 1999

SPENDER J

BRISBANE

8 DECEMBER 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	Q 297 OF 1999

BETWEEN:	AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION APPLICANT
AND:	WORLD NETSAFE PTY LTD (ACN 087 515 848) FIRST RESPONDENT TERENCE BUTLER SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	SPENDER J
DATE OF ORDER:	8 DECEMBER 2000
WHERE MADE:	BRISBANE

THE COURT FINDS AND DECLARES THAT:

1. The First Respondent engaged in the following conduct and made the following representations in connection with the promotion and operation of the scheme described in “Schedule A” (“the World Netsafe Scheme”):

(a) that arrangements had been made which would enable holders of World Netsafe ATTM Cards under the World Netsafe Scheme (“the Card”) to use the Card to make telephone calls anywhere in the world at competitive rates;

(b) that arrangements had been made which would enable members and holders of the Card to purchase a “universal currency” called “teleminutes” on their Card;

(i) for the establishment of accounts linked to Cards;

(ii) for the managing of such accounts in a manner which would enable prepaid teleminutes to be managed and handled;

(d) until in or about August 1999, that such arrangements had been made with Chase Bank of Texas;

(e) that arrangements had been made with two Australian banks through which money could be credited to the Card;

(f) that arrangements had been made with participating banks in Australia through which money could be credited to the Card;

(g) that arrangements had been made with Price Waterhouse for that firm to certify the ATTM software;

(h) until about October 1999, that arrangements had been made with Visa which would enable members and holders of the Card to make purchases from any of the 35 million establishments in the world that traditionally accept Visa cards;

(i) from about November 1999, that arrangements had been made with Maestro which would enable members and holders of the Card to make purchases from any establishment in the world that accepted Maestro cards;

(j) that arrangements had been made which would enable members and holders of the Card to make purchases from establishments that accepted well known debit cards;

(k) until about October 1999, that arrangements had been made with Visa for the issuing of the Card with Visa debit card facilities;

(l) from about November 1999, that arrangements had been made with MasterCard for the issuing of the Card with Maestro/Cirrus debit card facilities;

(m) that:

(i) in the professional opinion of World Netsafe, the offer made by Maestro/Cirrus was clearly superior to the offer made by Visa;

(ii) this professional opinion was the reason for the change from Visa to Maestro/Cirrus;

(n) that arrangements had been made which would enable members and holders of the Card to obtain cash from large numbers of automatic teller machines;

(o) until about October 1999, that arrangements had been made with Visa which would enable members and holders of the Card to obtain cash from any automatic teller machine which was linked to the Visa system;

(p) from about November 1999, that arrangements had been made with Cirrus which would enable members and holders of the Card to obtain cash from any automatic teller machine which was linked to the Cirrus system;

(q) until about October 1999, that arrangements had been made with Visa for the issuing of the Card with Visa debit card facilities;

(r) that arrangements had been made which would enable a prior member to receive, at the time when a subsequent member purchased teleminutes on their card or redeemed them for goods and services, a percentage (paid in teleminutes) paid directly into the account of the prior member;

(s) that arrangements had been made which would enable a prior member to receive, when the subsequent member used their Card at an automatic teller machine, a percentage (paid in teleminutes) paid directly into their account;

(t) prior to August 1999 that it had reasonable grounds for the opinion that the Card would be launched in early August 1999;

(u) on 29 November 1999, that it had reasonable grounds for the opinion that the Card should be available for distribution in the next week or so;

(v) on 1 December 1999, that it had reasonable grounds for the opinion that the Card should be available for distribution within the next couple of days;

(w) in November and December 1999, that the Card was being printed right now;

(x) that the World Netsafe Scheme had been cleared or approved by regulatory authorities, such as the Applicant or the Western Australian Office of Fair Trading;

(y) that the Card existed, and could be obtained by members;

(z) that it was feasible for members to earn in excess of $14,788 per month from their membership or from holding a World Netsafe Platinum Founder’s Card;

and in doing so:

(aa) in respect of the matters at 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 1(g), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(m), 1(n), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), 1(r), 1(s), 1(t), 1(u), 1(v), 1(w), 1(x), 1(y), 1(z) above, engaged in conduct that was misleading or deceptive or was likely to mislead or deceive in contravention of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth);

(bb) in respect of the matters at 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 1(h), 1i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(n), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), 1(r) and 1(s) above, falsely represented that services were of a particular standard quality, value or grade in contravention of section 53(aa) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth);

(cc) in respect of the matters at 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(n), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), 1(r), 1(s) and 1(x) above, falsely represented that goods or services had sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, uses or benefits they did not have in contravention of section 53(c), of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth);

(dd) in respect of the matters at 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 1(g), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(l), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), and 1(x) above, falsely represented that the First Respondent had a sponsorship, approval or affiliation it did not have in contravention of section 53(d) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth);

(ee) in respect of the matters at 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 1(g), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(m), 1(n), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), 1(r), 1(s), 1(t), 1(u), 1(v), 1(w), 1(x), 1(y) and 1(z) above, made false or misleading representations concerning the profitability or risk or any other material aspect of a business activity in contravention of section 59 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth);

(ff) accepted payment for goods or services as part of the World Netsafe Scheme where, at the time of the acceptance, there were reasonable grounds, of which the First Respondent was aware or ought reasonably to have been aware, for believing that the First Respondent would not be able to supply the goods or services within the periods variously specified by the First Respondent, or within a reasonable time; in contravention of section 58 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).

2. In the operation of the World Netsafe Scheme as described in “Schedule A”:

(a) the First Respondent induced persons to acquire goods or services by representing that the persons would, after the contract for the acquisition of the goods or services was made, receive a rebate, commission or other benefit in return for giving the First Respondent the names of prospective customers or otherwise assisting the First Respondent to supply goods or services to other consumers where receipt of the rebate, commission or other benefit was contingent on an event occurring after that contract was made in contravention of section 57 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth); and

(b) the First Respondent promoted the World Netsafe Scheme in which persons who were participants in the World Netsafe Scheme, or had applied or been invited to become participants in the World Netsafe Scheme, made a payment to or for the benefit of the First Respondent, being a payment that they were induced to make by reasons that the prospect was held out to them of receiving payments or other benefits in respect of the introduction (whether by themselves or by another person) of other persons who became participants in the World Netsafe Scheme in contravention of section 61 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).

3. The Second Respondent was knowingly concerned in and a party to the contraventions of the First Respondent:

(a) described in paragraph 1(aa), as regards the representations in 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(m), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), 1(y) and 1(z) above;

(b) described in paragraph 1(bb), as regards the representations in 1(a), 1(c), 1(d), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(o), 1(p) and 1(q) above;

(c) described in paragraph 1(cc), as regards the representations in 1(a), 1(c), 1(d), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(o), 1(p) and 1(q) above;

(d) described in paragraph 1(dd), as regards the representations in 1(c), 1(d), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(l), 1(o), 1(p) and 1(q) above;

(e) described in paragraph 1(ee), as regards the representations in 1(a), 1(c), 1(d), 1(h), 1(i), 1(j), 1(k), 1(l), 1(m), 1(o), 1(p), 1(q), 1(y) and 1(z) above; and

(f) as regards the conduct described in paragraph 1(ff) above; and

(g) as regards the conduct described in paragraph 2 above.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

4. The First Respondent is restrained by itself, its servants or agents or otherwise howsoever, and by any means whatsoever including by utilising the Internet World Wide Web and electronic mail system, in connection with the promotion or operation of the World Netsafe Scheme and any other similar such scheme, whether in Australia or elsewhere, from:

(a) engaging in conduct that is misleading and deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive in contravention of sections 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 1(aa) above, or representations to a similar effect;

(b) making false representations in contravention of section 53(aa) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 1(bb) above as applying section 53(aa) or representations to a similar effect;

(c) making false representations in contravention of section 53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 1(cc) above as applying section 53(c) or representations to a similar effect;

(d) making false representations in contravention of section 53(d) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 1(dd) above as applying section 53(d) or representations to a similar effect;

(e) making false or misleading representations in contravention of section 59 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 1(ee) above as applying section 59 or representations to a similar effect;

(f) accepting payment for goods or services of the kind the subject of the World Netsafe Scheme where, at that time of the acceptance, there are reasonable grounds, of which the First Respondent is aware or ought reasonably to be aware, for believing that the First Respondent will not be able to supply the goods or services within a period specified by the First Respondent or within a reasonable time, in contravention of section 58 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth); and

(g) inducing persons to acquire goods or services of the kind the subject of the World Netsafe Scheme by representing that the persons will, after the contract for the acquisition of the goods or services is made, receive a rebate, commission or other benefit in return for giving the First Respondent the names of prospective customers or otherwise assisting the First Respondent to supply goods or services to other consumers where receipt of the rebate is made in contravention of section 57 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth); and

(h) promoting the World Netsafe Scheme, or any similar scheme in which persons who are participants in the scheme, or have applied or been invited to become participants in the scheme, make a payment to or for the benefit of the First Respondent, being a payment that they are induced to make by reason that the prospect is held out to them of receiving payments or other benefits in respect of the introduction (whether by themselves or by another person) of other persons who become participants in the scheme in contravention of section 61 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).

5. The Second Respondent is restrained by himself, his servants or agents or otherwise howsoever, and by any means whatsoever including by utilising the Internet World Wide Web and electronic mail system, in connection with the promotion or operation of the world Netsafe Scheme and any other similar such scheme whether in Australia or elsewhere from:

(a) engaging in conduct that is misleading and deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive in contravention of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 3(a) above, or representations to a similar effect;

(b) making false representations in contravention of section 53(aa) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 3(b) above as applying to section 53(aa) or representations to a similar effect;

(c) making false representations in contravention of section 53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 3(c) above as applying to section 53(c) or representations to a similar effect;

(d) making false representations in contravention of section 53(d) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 3(d) above as applying to section 53(d) or representations to a similar effect;

(e) making false or misleading representations in contravention of section 59 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by making representations to the effect of those identified in paragraph 3(e) above as applying to section 59 or representations to a similar effect;

(f) accepting payment for goods or services of the kind the subject of the World Netsafe Scheme where, at that time of the acceptance, there are reasonable grounds, of which the person accepting payment is aware or ought reasonably to be aware, for believing that the person accepting payment will not be able to supply the goods or services within a period specified by the person accepting payment or within a reasonable time, in contravention of section 58 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth); and

(g) inducing persons to acquire goods or services of the kind the subject of the World Netsafe Scheme by representing that the persons will, after the contract for the acquisition of the goods or services is made, receive a rebate, commission or other benefit in return for giving a person the names of prospective customers or otherwise assisting the person to supply goods or services to other consumers where receipt of the rebate is made in contravention of section 57 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth); and

(h) promoting the World Netsafe Scheme, or any similar scheme in which persons who are participants in the scheme, or have applied or been invited to become participants in the scheme, make a payment to or for the benefit of a person, being a payment that they are induced to make by reason that the prospect is held out to them of receiving payments or other benefits in respect of the introduction (whether by themselves or by another person) of other persons who become participants in the scheme in contravention of section 61 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth); and

(i) from being in any way directly or indirectly knowingly concerned in or a party to such conduct and representations

insofar as:

(j) the Second Respondent is in any way directly or indirectly knowingly concerned in the conduct of a corporation;

(k) section 5 or section 6 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) is applicable to the Second Respondent, or any person in whose conduct the Second Respondent is in any way directly or indirectly knowingly concerned or to which the Second Respondent is party, through:

(i) engaging in conduct outside Australia when an Australian citizen or ordinarily resident within Australia;

(ii) trade or commerce:

(A) between Australia and places outside Australia;

(B) among the States;

(D) between a State and a Territory

(E) by way of the supply or services to the commonwealth or an authority or instrumentality of the Commonwealth;

(iii) engaging in conduct to the extent to which the conduct involves the use of postal, telegraphic or telephonic services or takes place in a radio or television broadcast.

6. The First and Second Respondents at their expense maintain the websites:

(a) http://www.worldnetsafe.com; and

(b) http://www.worldnetsafe.com.au

and publish on the whole of the home page thereon the Notice at Schedule B (“the Notice”), as an htm page into the frameset of the homepage of World Netsafe in the same dimensions and layout as specified by the Applicant so that the htm page dominates the whole page of the homepage, providing a hotlink thereon to the web address http://www.accc.gov.au continuously for 6 months commencing forthwith.

7. The First and Second Respondents at their expense publish the Notice by forwarding it forthwith:

(a) by electronic mail transmission to all past and current members of the World Netsafe Scheme whose electronic mail address is known to the respondents, including to those persons who have an electronic mail address containing the symbols “@worldnetsafe.com”, each such message being simultaneously sent in the same electronic mail transmission to the Applicant at http://www.bnecompl@accc.gov.au; and

(b) by the postal service to all past and current members of the World Netsafe Scheme, a copy of the notice and a list of the names and addresses of the persons to whom it was sent being served immediately thereafter upon the Applicant.

8. The First and Second Respondents at their expense publish the Notice, apart from the words and symbols “[insert hotlink to:]”, in the publications:

(a) “The Weekend Australian” newspaper;

(b) “Money” magazine; and

within 28 days of the making of this order, on the right hand side of a right hand page within the first 7 pages of the publication, occupying a space not less than one-fifth of a page of the publication.

9. In respect of each publication of the Notice, the First and Second Respondents cause the Notice to be published in accordance with specifications provided to the Respondents by the Applicant, including specifications as to the colours, text sizes, fonts, layout and space occupation.

10. The First and Second Respondents refund within 28 days of the making of this order any monies paid to the First or Second Respondents by each person participating or who has participated in the World Netsafe Scheme at any time whether in Australia or elsewhere, after deducting any monies paid to that participant by the First or Second Respondent in respect of their participation in the World Netsafe Scheme.

11. The First and Second Respondents return forthwith any payment, held by or for them at the date of this order or received in the future, from persons attempting to participate in the World Netsafe Scheme.

12. The First and Second Respondents deliver forthwith to the Applicant particulars of each person participating, or who has participated in the World Netsafe Scheme at any time whether in Australia or elsewhere including:

(a) The name and address of the person;

(b) The date the person joined the World Netsafe Scheme;

(d) The designated number of any card paid for by the person;

(e) Where the First Respondent has paid any monies to the person, the date, amount and purpose of each such payment.

13. The Second Respondent undertake a Trade Practices Compliance Program in the form at “Schedule C”.

14. The First and Second Respondents pay the Applicant’s costs of and incidental to the Notice of Motion filed on 13 November 2000 and heard on 17 November 2000 including the hearing date, on an indemnity basis.

The First and Second Respondents pay the Applicant’s costs of and incidental to this proceeding, including any reserved costs.

SCHEDULE A

The Scheme was known as the world Netsafe Scheme and was structured as follows:

(a) World Netsafe provided goods or services, including the World Netsafe ATTM Cards and in particular the World Netsafe Platinum Founder’s Card, and access to methods and techniques of leaders in business and personal development, in the form of audio and video tapes and manuals;

(b) Persons applied to become members of World Netsafe by completing and signing a member’s application and agreement form (“the application form”) and applied for a World Netsafe Platinum Founder’s Card by completing and signing a member’s order form;

(i) as a result of promotion of the World Netsafe Scheme by World Netsafe;

(ii) as a result of their being canvassed by existing members of World Netsafe;

(d) The application form provided for the applicant to identify a sponsor who was already a member of World Netsafe. On joining, the applicant became a “first generation” member in relation to the sponsor;

(e) The cost of becoming a member of the World Netsafe Scheme or the cost of obtaining a World Netsafe Platinum Founder’s Card, was US1,500 or AU$2,389;

(f) The goods or services provided by World Netsafe to a new member were supplied to that new member under the transaction constituted by the applicant becoming a member of the World Netsafe Scheme;

(g) That transaction was arranged or effected:

(i) in the case of some applicants, by World Netsafe;

(ii) in the case of some applicants, by sponsors;

(h) An amount of money, which was equal to a proportion of the amount paid by a person to become a member, or to become a holder of a World Netsafe Platinum Founder’s Card, (being 20% of 20% of $2,290) was paid by World Netsafe to the sponsor of that person;

(i) All a member had to do was to get people (referred to as the “first generation” for that member) to become members of World Netsafe, and help them to do the same thing (the members recruited by the first generation for the original member being referred to as the “second generation” for the original member), and before long the member would have an organisation of World Netsafe members who would help generate an income for the member every time they used their World Netsafe ATTM Card;

(j) Depending on the number of subsequent members introduced by an original member, and generations subsequent to the original member, the original member would earn income in respect of up to 10 generations from the original member;

(k) An amount of money which was equal to a proportion of the amount paid by a person to become a member or to obtain a World Netsafe Platinum Founder’s Card was paid by World Netsafe to the sponsor of that person.

SCHEDULE B

[INSERT WORLD NETSAFE LOGO]

WORLD NETSAFE

ATTENTION – IMPORTANT NOTICE

APOLOGY & REFUNDS

The Internet World Wide Web and e-mail system has been used to promote and operate the World Netsafe ATTM Card Scheme.

The World Netsafe ATTM Card Scheme is an illegal pyramid and referral selling scheme. The promoters misled people into joining the Scheme.

Where is the Card? There is not – and never was – a World Netsafe ATTM Card available and suitable for use by scheme members.

The Federal Court of Australia has stopped the World Netsafe ATTM Card Scheme, following legal action by the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, an Australian Government Agency.

During 1999 & 2000, World Netsafe Pty Ltd and Terence Butler promoted and operated the World Netsafe Scheme in Australia and overseas, including on the Internet World Wide Web. The following claims were made about the World Netsafe ATTM Card.

All of these claims were untrue:

§ The Card was, or would soon be, available for use by Scheme members

§ The Card was associated with Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, Cirrus, or utilised some other electronic communication network relating to banking or commerce, so that the World Netsafe ATTM Card could be used at ATMs and POS terminals world-wide

§ The Card was associated with an account managed by Chase bank and Australian banks and through which money could be deposited onto the Card

§ The Card operated on software which would be certified by Price Waterhouse

§ The Card had been cleared or approved by Australian regulatory authorities

§ That arrangements had been made which would allow people in the world Netsafe Scheme to earn income from becoming a member or holding a Card in the Scheme, by introducing others to the Scheme or from transactions of other cardholders

§ That arrangements had been made so that the Card could be used to make cheap telephone calls anywhere in the world

§ That arrangements had been made so that the Card would record a universal currency “Teleminutes” which was convertible to any currency

The Court has ordered World Netsafe Pty Ltd and Terence Butler to publish this notice, and to return money paid into the scheme by people who attempted to obtain a World Netsafe ATTM Card.

For details of the Court’s judgment including entitlements to refunds, and background, click on the Media Releases link on the home page of the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, an Australian Government Agency.

[insert hotlink to:] http://www.accc.gov.au

Terry Butler

CEO & Director

World Netsafe Pty Ltd

SCHEDULE C

(a) The Second Respondent will attend a Trade Practices Compliance seminar (“The Seminar”) conducted by a person nominated by the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPLIANCE PROFESSIONALS OF AUSTRALIA INCORPORATED.

(b) The Seminar is to take place within 6 months of the date of this order, on a date and at a place nominated by the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPLIANCE PROFESSIONALS OF AUSTRALIA INCORPORATED.

(i) The Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) general;

(ii) Part V of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), an overview;

(iii) Section 52;

(iv) Section 53;

(v) Section 57;

(vi) Section 58;

(vii) Section 59;

(viii) Section 61; and

(ix) Conclusion.

(d) The Second Respondent will, within one week of attending the Seminar, notify the Applicant of his attendance, including the date and place of the Seminar and the name of the person who conducted it.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	Q 297 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION

APPLICANT

AND:

WORLD NETSAFE PTY LTD (ACN 087 515 848)

FIRST RESPONDENT

TERENCE BUTLER

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	SPENDER J
DATE:	8 DECEMBER 2000
PLACE:	BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) commenced proceedings in this Court against World Netsafe Pty Ltd and Terence Butler seeking declaratory relief pursuant to s 21 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976, injunctions pursuant to s 80 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, corrective advertising pursuant to s 80A of the Trade Practices Act, the making of findings for the purposes of s 83 of the Trade Practices Act, and for costs. In addition, there was an application for compensation pursuant to s 87(1)B of the Trade Practices Act. That part of the application will not be finalised by the orders which I propose to make and I have adjourned it to Friday 6 February 2001 for directions, should that be necessary.

2 There has been extensive affidavit material put before the Court. Mr Butler, who is the sole shareholder and director of World Netsafe, has indicated in a letter to the Registrar that he did not intend to be heard in defence of the application made by the ACCC. I have had regard to the contents of that letter, but the position is that the affidavit material before me has been sworn to and has been unchallenged. That material demonstrates comprehensively that there have been widespread contraventions of a number of the provisions of the Trade Practices Act: ss 52, 53AA, 53(c), 53(d), 57, 58, 59 and 61.

3 There are really two aspects of the scheme that World Netsafe marketed, and in which Terence Butler was intimately concerned, which contravene the Trade Practices Act. The first aspect of real concern is that it was a blatant referral or pyramid selling scheme, and the promotional material used in the marketing of the scheme made it plain that the ability to generate income for a particular member from others introduced and by other later participants in the scheme was the central feature of the World Netsafe ATTM card scheme. A brochure used in promotion of the card said:

“What sets the World Netsafe ATTM card apart from any other system in the world is the ability to generate income for the cardholder. When a member introduced by you, purchases teleminutes on the card and redeems them for goods and services worldwide, the member will receive at the time of the transaction a percentage (paid in teleminutes) paid directly into their account.”

4 I am quite satisfied that this feature of the scheme was the central inducement to purchasers to pay monies on account of participation in the scheme to World Netsafe, and the material shows that more than $4,178,000 was paid to World Netsafe in respect of the sales of "platinum cards". This figure comes from the financial documents of World Netsafe exhibited to the affidavit of John Davies sworn on 23 December 1999.

5 The second major feature of the scheme were the misrepresentations of what in fact could be done with it. While it may have been hoped by the promoters of the scheme that the features represented as being possessed by the card would come about in the fullness of time, it is plain beyond argument that none of the promised features were in fact possessed by the card at the time of its sale, and as the figures to which I have just referred indicate, there were a large number of people who were induced both by the pyramid selling income streams promised by use of the card and by the features of the services which it was promised the card would permit the holder to have.

6 It is unnecessary to make further detailed reference to the evidence, but on the whole of the material before me, I make the following findings and declarations: