McLachlan, Hamish Boyd v Australian Securities Comm & Anor [1998] FCA 951

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - CORPORATIONS LAW - Australian Securities Commission - banning order against unlicensed person - reason to believe that person has not performed honestly, efficiently and fairly the duties of a representative of a dealer - whether natural justice obliges the Australian Securities Commission to provide an applicant with all relevant material which it holds - whether the Australian Securities Commission can rely on material adverse to the applicant while excluding other relevant material - whether information acquired by decision maker in one capacity must be disclosed when acting in another capacity. Australian Securities Commission Act 1989 (Cth), s 57, s 59, s 60, s 102

Corporations Law, s 784, s 829(f), s 829, s 830, s 837 Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act, 1977 (Cth) ss 5, 6, s 6(1)(a) Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550 (Considered) Laycock v Forbes (1997) 25 ACSR 659 (Applied) Winter v Australian Securities Commission (1995) 16 ACSR 61 (Followed) Rose v Bridges (1997) 149 ALR 710 (Applied) Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24 (Applied) Hughes Aircraft Systems International v Airservices Australia (1997) 146 ALR 1 (Applied) HAMISH BOYD MCLACHLAN (Applicant) v AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES COMMISSION (First Respondent) VALDEMAR MALINARIC (Second Respondent)

SG 58 of 1998 FINN J 31 JULY 1998 SYDNEY (HEARD IN ADELAIDE)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY SG58 of 1998

BETWEEN: HAMISH BOYD McLACHLAN

Applicant

AND: AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES COMMISSION

First Respondent

VALDEMAR MALINARIC

Second Respondent

JUDGE: FINN J

DATE OF ORDER: 31 JULY 1998

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY (HEARD IN ADELAIDE)