Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Joyce, what will the effect of this be? My understanding is that the reversal of the onus of proof in the bill would put the onus on the business party to establish that the term is reasonably necessary to protect the business’ legitimate interest. As I see it, these amendments would make it more difficult for consumers in the context of the framework of this bill. I may be mistaken. I would be grateful if Senator Joyce could outline what it will do in practical terms in a dispute between a consumer and a small business in terms of the evidentiary burden. We here all know that one of the great problems we have in this country in terms of access to justice is that when you have a legal dispute between a party with shallow pockets and a party with very deep pockets, the party with a lack of resources generally misses out, because they cannot afford to have their case, however legitimate or meritorious it may be, heard to a conclusion in the courts because of the costs involved.