A Company Won and Was Partly Paid for a Contract

A company won and was partly paid for a contract to provide security services although it knew it could not supply the staff and equipment required under the contract for that price.Which of the following statements are true in relation to the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) ?

A) This conduct will breach s 36 of the ACL which prohibits accepting payment without intention to supply goods or services.
B) This conduct is similar to Dawson v World Travel where a travel company accepted payment for a tour although it knew the tour would run for less than its advertised time period.
C) The security company will only breach s 36 of the ACL which prohibits accepting payment without intention to supply if it accepts full payment for the contract.
D) All of the above.
E) A and B above only.