Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (No 2) [2023] FCA 1217 File number: VID 1153 of 2018
Judgment of: MOSHINSKY J
Date of judgment: 13 October 2023
Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – continuous disclosure – share placement – where the defendant (ANZ) undertook a fully underwritten institutional share placement to raise $2.5 billion – where the Underwriters recommended that approximately $754 million of the shares (later adjusted to approximately $790 million of the shares) not be allocated to investors, and be taken up by the Underwriters, and ANZ accepted that recommendation – where ANZ's completion announcement stated that it had raised $2.5 billion in equity but did not refer to the fact that approximately $790 million of the shares had not been allocated to institutional investors and therefore would be taken up by the Underwriters – whether ANZ breached its continuous disclosure obligation under s 674(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – whether the pleaded information was not "generally available" – whether the pleaded information was material – held: ANZ breached its continuous disclosure obligation
Legislation: Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth), s 19 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 674, 675, 676, 677, 798H ASIC Market Integrity Rules (ASX Market) 2010
Cases cited: Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited [2019] FCA 964 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd (No 5) [2009] FCA 1586; 264 ALR 201 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v GetSwift Ltd (Liability Hearing) [2021] FCA 1384 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Vocation Ltd [2019] FCA 807; 371 ALR 155 Bert v Red 5 Ltd [2016] QSC 302; 349 ALR 210 Crowley v Worley Ltd [2022] FCAFC 33; 293 FCR 438 Cruickshank v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2022] FCAFC 128; 292 FCR 627 Grant-Taylor v Babcock & Brown Ltd (in liq) [2015] FCA 149; 322 ALR 723 Grant-Taylor v Babcock & Brown Ltd (in liq) [2016] FCAFC 60; 245 FCR 402 Jubilee Mines NL v Riley [2009] WASCA 62; 40 WAR 299
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