This note discusses the High Court of Australia decision of Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Bank Group Limited on the rule against penalty clauses and situates its importance in light of the UK Supreme Court decision of Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi and Beavis v ParkingEye Ltd. It compares the analytical frameworks laid down in the two cases and points out some unresolved issues in this area of law even following these cases.
