Australian Prudential Regulation Authority v Siminton (No 3) [2006] FCA 397

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Prudential Regulation Authority v Siminton (No 3) [2006] FCA 397 CONTEMPT – whether imprisonment is an appropriate penalty for a deliberate defiance of interim orders made by the Court

Banking Act 1959 (Cth) Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)

Australian Prudential Regulation Authority v Siminton [2006] FCA 326 - cited Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v Design Elegance Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 83 - applied Australian Industry Group v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union [2000] FCA 629 - cited Pelechowski v The Registrar, Court of Appeal (1998) 198 CLR 435 - cited Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Info4pc.com (2002) 121 FCR 24 - cited AUSTRALIAN PRUDENTIAL REGULATION AUTHORITY v DAVID ROBERT SIMINTON VID 1607 OF 2005 MERKEL J 10 APRIL 2006 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VID 1607 OF 2005

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN PRUDENTIAL REGULATION AUTHORITY

APPLICANT

AND: DAVID ROBERT SIMINTON

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: MERKEL J

DATE OF ORDER: 10 APRIL 2006

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT DECLARES THAT: 1. The respondent is guilty of contempt by reason of the matters set out in charges 1.1, 1.2 and 1.5 of the statement of charge dated 4 January 2006 and in charges 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 of the statement of charge dated 19 January 2006.

AND THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 2. (a) The respondent be imprisoned for a period of 10 weeks in respect of the contempt the subject of charges 1.1 and 1.2 of the statement of charge dated 4 January 2006 and charges 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 of the statement of charge dated 19 January 2006. (b) A warrant issue for the committal of the respondent to prison for a period of 10 weeks. 3. (a) A fine in the sum of $5 000 be imposed on the respondent in respect of the contempt the subject of charge 1.5 of the statement of charge dated 4 January 2006. (b) The fine be paid to the District Registrar within 60 days or such further time and by such instalments as the District Registrar may allow; (c) In the event that there is default in payment of the fine or in any instalment, the District Registrar shall apply to a judge of the Court for directions concerning enforcement. 4. The respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the motions of the applicant dated 29 December 2005 and 19 January 2006, on a party-party basis.