Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Fortescue Metals Group (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 68

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Fortescue Metals Group (No 2) [2011] FCAFC 68

The respondents' proposed form of order more precisely reflected the Court's conclusion that Fortescue contravened s 674(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) after its initial disclosure of information about the framework agreements and that, in relation to each framework agreement, there was one contravention. Accordingly, order 2 pronounced on 18 February 2011 was varied in that form.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Variation of Orders
Outcome
Order 2 pronounced on 18 February 2011 varied; no variation sought to orders 1, 3 and 4.
Legal Topics
['continuous Disclosure' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct in Relation to Financial Products' "directors' Duties" 'declarations of Contravention' 'variation of Orders']
['corporations Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['continuous Disclosure' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct in Relation to Financial Products' "directors' Duties" 'declarations of Contravention' 'variation of Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Variation of Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether greater specificity was required in declarations made pursuant to s 1317E(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).' 'Whether order 2 pronounced on 18 February 2011 should be varied under O 35 r 7(3) of the Federal Court Rules.' "Whether ASIC's proposed form of order or the respondents' proposed form of order more precisely reflected the Court's conclusions."]

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents' proposed form of order more precisely reflected the Court's conclusion that Fortescue contravened s 674(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) after its initial disclosure of information about the framework agreements and that, in relation to each framework agreement, there was one contravention. Accordingly, order 2 pronounced on 18 February 2011 was varied in that form.

Court Disposition

Order 2 pronounced on 18 February 2011 varied; no variation sought to orders 1, 3 and 4.

Orders

  • ['The Court varies order 2 pronounced on 18 February 2011.' 'The order made on the 23 December 2009 be set aside and in lieu thereof detailed declarations are made that the first respondent contravened s 674(2) and s 1041H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in relation to the CREC, CHEC and CMCC Framework...