In Australian Finance Direct Limited v Director of Consumer Affairs Victoria  HCA 57 the High Court upheld a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria that a form of credit contract used by Australian Finance Direct Limited (AFD) in certain transactions contravened the
disclosure requirements in s 15(B)(a)(ii) of the Consumer Credit Code.
AFD made loans to people who wished to attend property investment seminars conducted by a third party but who did not wish (or were unable) to pay
the fees for the seminars in cash. The purpose of the credit was to enable them to defer payment.
But the loan contracts did not disclose "holdbacks" retained by AFD which amounted to between 10% and 40% of the loan amount depending on its assessment of the risk of the borrower.
The High Court decided that the credit contracts of AFD did not comply with the requirements of
s 15(B)(a)(ii). Because of the non-disclosure of the holdbacks,
they did not identify the persons (including the credit provider) to
whom the amount of credit was to be paid, or the amounts payable
to each of them.