| Preface |
|
vii | |
| Acknowledgements |
|
ix | |
| Abbreviations |
|
xvii | |
|
|
|
xix | |
|
|
|
1 | (11) |
|
|
|
1 | (1) |
|
|
|
2 | (2) |
|
A Background (Chapter Two) |
|
|
2 | (1) |
|
B Analytical Framework (Chapter Three) |
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
C Case Studies (Chapter Four) |
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
D Application of the Analytical Framework (Chapter Five) |
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
E Effectiveness and Coexistence of Regulatory Enforcement and Class Actions (Chapter Six) |
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
F Public and Private Enforcement Recalibrated (Chapter Seven) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
G Coordination of Public and Private Enforcement (Chapter Eight) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
III Scope of Study and Text |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
|
6 | (5) |
|
A Outcomes -- Deterrence and Compensation |
|
|
7 | (2) |
|
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
C Public and Private Enforcement Recalibrated |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
D Coordination of Public and Private Enforcement |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
|
|
11 | (1) |
|
|
|
12 | (33) |
|
|
|
12 | (1) |
|
|
|
12 | (10) |
|
|
|
12 | (3) |
|
B Stock Exchange Listing Rules |
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
C Corporations Act, Ch 6CA |
|
|
16 | (2) |
|
|
|
18 | (3) |
|
E Private Cause of Action for Compensation |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
III Misleading or Deceptive Conduct |
|
|
22 | (4) |
|
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
B Securities and Misleading Conduct |
|
|
23 | (2) |
|
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
D Private Cause of Action for Compensation |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
|
|
26 | (7) |
|
A ASIC's Approach to Enforcement |
|
|
26 | (1) |
|
B Responsive Regulation - The Enforcement Pyramid |
|
|
27 | (2) |
|
C ASIC and Enforcement of the Continuous Disclosure Regime |
|
|
29 | (4) |
|
V Shareholder Class Actions |
|
|
33 | (10) |
|
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
B The Role of Class Actions |
|
|
34 | (2) |
|
C Federal Court of Australia Act, Part IVA |
|
|
36 | (5) |
|
D Typical Shareholder Class Action |
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
|
|
41 | (2) |
|
|
|
43 | (2) |
|
|
|
45 | (43) |
|
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
|
|
46 | (13) |
|
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
B Why is it an Objective? |
|
|
46 | (2) |
|
C Dimensions of Deterrence |
|
|
48 | (2) |
|
D What Makes Deterrence Effective? |
|
|
50 | (5) |
|
E Limitations of the Sanctions Approach to Deterrence |
|
|
55 | (4) |
|
|
|
59 | (12) |
|
|
|
59 | (1) |
|
B Why is it an Objective? |
|
|
59 | (4) |
|
C How should Compensation be Accessed? |
|
|
63 | (2) |
|
D When is Compensation Achieved? |
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
E Limits on Achieving Complete Compensation |
|
|
66 | (5) |
|
IV The Regulatory Process |
|
|
71 | (15) |
|
A Why Assess the Regulatory Process? |
|
|
71 | (1) |
|
|
|
72 | (3) |
|
|
|
75 | (3) |
|
|
|
78 | (5) |
|
|
|
83 | (3) |
|
|
|
86 | (2) |
|
|
|
88 | (22) |
|
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
|
|
88 | (5) |
|
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
B Selection of Case Studies |
|
|
89 | (2) |
|
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
E Limitations of the Methodology |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
|
|
93 | (3) |
|
|
|
93 | (2) |
|
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
|
|
96 | (4) |
|
|
|
96 | (1) |
|
|
|
97 | (3) |
|
|
|
100 | (5) |
|
|
|
100 | (3) |
|
|
|
103 | (2) |
|
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
VII Conclusion -- Summary of Case Studies |
|
|
107 | (3) |
|
5 Application of the Analytical Framework to the Case Studies |
|
|
110 | (39) |
|
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
II Application of the Analytical Framework -- Deterrence |
|
|
111 | (16) |
|
A Dimensions of Deterrence |
|
|
111 | (7) |
|
B Effectiveness and Limitations of Deterrence |
|
|
118 | (9) |
|
III Application of the Analytical Framework -- Compensation |
|
|
127 | (8) |
|
|
|
127 | (2) |
|
B Limitations on Achieving Full Compensation |
|
|
129 | (6) |
|
IV Application of the Analytical Framework -- Regulatory Process |
|
|
135 | (12) |
|
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
|
|
136 | (4) |
|
|
|
140 | (4) |
|
|
|
144 | (3) |
|
|
|
147 | (2) |
|
6 Effectiveness and Coexistence of Regulatory Enforcement and Class Actions |
|
|
149 | (30) |
|
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
II Effectiveness of ASIC Enforcement and Class Actions |
|
|
149 | (16) |
|
A ASIC and Deterrence -- Reputation |
|
|
150 | (2) |
|
B ASIC and Deterrence -- Direct Sanctions |
|
|
152 | (2) |
|
C ASIC and Deterrence -- Indirect Costs |
|
|
154 | (1) |
|
D Class Actions and Incidental Deterrence |
|
|
154 | (1) |
|
E Deterrence without Findings of Contravention? |
|
|
155 | (2) |
|
F Class Actions and Compensation |
|
|
157 | (3) |
|
|
|
160 | (1) |
|
H Individuals Rarely Pursued |
|
|
161 | (2) |
|
I The Paradox of Insurance |
|
|
163 | (1) |
|
J Summary of the Effectiveness of ASIC Enforcement and Class Actions |
|
|
164 | (1) |
|
III Ramifications of ASIC Enforcement and Class Actions Coexistence |
|
|
165 | (9) |
|
|
|
166 | (1) |
|
B What is the Public Interest? |
|
|
166 | (1) |
|
C Regulator Discretion and the Enforcement Pyramid |
|
|
167 | (4) |
|
|
|
171 | (1) |
|
|
|
172 | (1) |
|
F Summary of ASIC Enforcement and Class Actions Coexistence |
|
|
173 | (1) |
|
|
|
174 | (5) |
|
A Effectiveness of ASIC Enforcement and the Class Action -- Outcomes |
|
|
174 | (3) |
|
B Ramifications of ASIC Enforcement and Class Actions Coexistence -- Process |
|
|
177 | (2) |
|
7 Public and Private Enforcement Recalibrated |
|
|
179 | (39) |
|
|
|
179 | (1) |
|
II ASIC's Enforcement Approach Revisited |
|
|
179 | (11) |
|
A ASIC's Approach to Misconduct and Choice of Enforcement Tools |
|
|
180 | (6) |
|
B Industry Funding of ASIC |
|
|
186 | (1) |
|
C Increased Penalties and Powers |
|
|
187 | (3) |
|
III Class Actions Revisited |
|
|
190 | (12) |
|
A ALRC Inquiry into Class Actions and Litigation Funding |
|
|
190 | (4) |
|
B First Continuous Disclosure Class Action Judgment |
|
|
194 | (1) |
|
C Regulation of Litigation Funding |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
D Group Costs Orders in Victoria |
|
|
197 | (2) |
|
E Second Continuous Disclosure Class Action Judgment |
|
|
199 | (1) |
|
F Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services |
|
|
200 | (2) |
|
IV Reformulating the Continuous Disclosure Laws |
|
|
202 | (6) |
|
A ALRC Inquiry into Class Actions and Litigation Funding |
|
|
202 | (1) |
|
B Requiring Intention or Fault for Liability -- Interim Measures |
|
|
203 | (2) |
|
C Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services |
|
|
205 | (1) |
|
D Requiring Intention or Fault for Liability -- Permanent Measures |
|
|
205 | (3) |
|
V ASIC Enforcement and Continuous Disclosure Class Actions Post-2017 |
|
|
208 | (8) |
|
|
|
208 | (5) |
|
B Continuous Disclosure Class Actions |
|
|
213 | (3) |
|
|
|
216 | (2) |
|
8 Coordination of Public and Private Enforcement |
|
|
218 | (27) |
|
|
|
218 | (1) |
|
|
|
218 | (3) |
|
A Overlapping Deterrence and Compensation |
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
B A Regulatory Process Perspective |
|
|
220 | (1) |
|
C Regulatory Pluralism and Coordination |
|
|
220 | (1) |
|
III Existing Coordination Mechanisms |
|
|
221 | (5) |
|
|
|
221 | (3) |
|
|
|
224 | (1) |
|
C Res Judicata, Estoppel and Abuse of Process |
|
|
225 | (1) |
|
D Access to ASIC Investigations |
|
|
226 | (1) |
|
IV Coordination in Other Regulatory Regimes |
|
|
226 | (9) |
|
A Environmental Law Citizen Suits |
|
|
226 | (3) |
|
B Employment Discrimination Claim |
|
|
229 | (1) |
|
|
|
230 | (2) |
|
D Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 |
|
|
232 | (2) |
|
E Taxonomy of Coordination Mechanisms |
|
|
234 | (1) |
|
V Concerns with Coordination |
|
|
235 | (1) |
|
VI Coordination Strategies for Securities Regulation |
|
|
236 | (7) |
|
A Information-sharing Approach |
|
|
237 | (2) |
|
|
|
239 | (4) |
|
|
|
243 | (2) |
|
|
|
245 | (19) |
|
I Interview Questions for ASIC |
|
|
245 | (1) |
|
II Interview Questions for Class Action Applicants, Litigation Funders and their Lawyers |
|
|
245 | (1) |
|
III Interview Questions for Regulated Entity/Class Action Respondents' Directors/Officers and their Lawyers |
|
|
246 | (1) |
|
|
|
247 | (1) |
|
V Interviews with Short Title |
|
|
247 | (2) |
|
|
|
249 | (1) |
|
Table 1 Continuous disclosure infringement notices from 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2021 |
|
|
249 | (2) |
|
Table 2 Continuous disclosure enforceable undertakings -- 1998 to 30 June 2021 |
|
|
251 | (3) |
|
Table 3 Continuous disclosure class actions -- 2002 to 30 June 2021 |
|
|
254 | (10) |
| Bibliography |
|
264 | (17) |
| Index |
|
281 | |