Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Matthews [1999] FCA 803 CONTEMPT – admitted contempt – breach of order made by the Court – order restraining respondent from publishing, or allowing to be published, securities reports on the internet – appropriate penalty – standard of proof applied in imposing sentence for contempt – range of available penalties – suspended term of imprisonment appropriate in the circumstances Corporations Law, ss 9, 18, 77, 92, 781, 1324(4) Federal Court Rules, O 40, r 6 Microsoft Corporation v Marks (No 1) (1996) 69 FCR 117, cited Witham v Holloway (1995) 183 CLR 525, cited R v O'Neill [1979] 2 NSWLR 582, cited Chow v Director of Public Prosecutions (1992) 28 NSWLR 593, cited R v Stephens (1976) 14 SASR 240, cited Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Hickey [1999] FCA 259, followed Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union v Mudginberri Station Pty Ltd (1986) 161 CLR 98, cited Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Goldstar Corporation Pty Ltd, unreported, Federal Court of Australia, 6 November 1998, followed
AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES & INVESTMENTS COMMISSION v STEPHEN LEWIS MATTHEWS N 3017 OF 1999 JUDGE: SACKVILLE J DATE: 16 JUNE 1999 PLACE: SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 3017 OF 1999
BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES & INVESTMENTS COMMISSION
Applicant
AND: STEPHEN LEWIS MATTHEWS
Respondent
JUDGE: SACKVILLE J
DATE OF ORDER: 16 JUNE 1999
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS AND DECLARES THAT: 1. The respondent, Stephen Lewis Matthews, is guilty of contempt of this Court by his conduct in disobeying an order made by O'Connor J on 19 February 1999, in that the respondent (a) on 8 March 1999 allowed to be published a securities report, entitled "GIO, Goodman F, Flight Center, Omnitech", on the web site known as The Chimes and situated at http://www.chimes.com.au; (b) on 10 March 1999 allowed to be published two securities reports, entitled "CBA, Harvey Norman, Novogen, Viking Industries, WD&HO Wills" and "BHP, AMP, Redflex, Secure Networks, Liberty One, ICM", on the web site known as The Chimes and situated at http://www.chimes.com.au; (c) on 12 March 1999 allowed to be published a securities report, entitled "Cinimagic, Lion Nathan, Harvey Norman", on the web site known as The Chimes and situated at http://www.chimes.com.au; (d) on 13 March 1999 allowed to be published a securities report, entitled "HOY, will up profits due to Star Wars release...", on the web site known as The Chimes and situated at http://www.chimes.com.au; (e) on 15 March 1999 allowed to be published a securities report, entitled "Richfield Resources, PMP, Ozemail, Macquarie Bank, United Energy, Anglo Pacific", on the web site known as The Chimes and situated at http://www.chimes.com.au; and (f) on 15 March 1999 allowed to be published a securities report, entitled "One, TYA, CUP, WBC, ORI, AWA, ICT, FCL, FMH, IFA, CML, WNT, ABF", on the web site known as The Chimes and situated at http://www.chimes.com.au.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate