You are not logged in.

Introducing personal liability under the continuous disclosure regime : The essentials and non-essentials

McConvill, James 2004, Introducing personal liability under the continuous disclosure regime : The essentials and non-essentials, Australian journal of corporate law, vol. 16, pp. 228-247.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Introducing personal liability under the continuous disclosure regime : The essentials and non-essentials
Author(s) McConvill, James
Journal name Australian journal of corporate law
Volume number 16
Start page 228
End page 247
Publisher Lexis Nexis Butterworths
Place of publication Chatswood, N.S.W.
Publication date 2004
ISSN 1037-4124
Summary Under the Federal Government's CLERP 9 legislation, expected at the time of writing to come into force in July 2004, personal liability will be introduced for the first time under the continuous disclosure regime. Individuals who are 'involved' in a failure to immediately disclose materially price sensitive information to the market will be subject to a civil penalty, in addition to the company being liable. According to the author, the introduction of personal liability per se is not contentious and indeed is a favourable change; what is questionable, however, is whether 'involvement' in a contravention is the appropriate test for imposing personal liability in relation to breaches of the continuous disclosure provisions. Based on the case law to date on the meaning of 'involved', there is particular uncertainty as to whether an individual would need to have actual knowledge that non-disclosed information is 'materially price sensitive' in order to satisfy the test of 'involved' in the context of continuous disclosure, or whether mere knowledge that the information has not been disclosed would be sufficient. This uncertainty arises due to the vague concept of 'essential matters' which the courts have developed as a test for what degree of knowledge a person needs to have in order to be 'involved'. The author argues that all the confusion as to what 'involved' means could be addressed by removing the word 'essential' from the dialogue, so that the test of 'involvement' would simply be based on whether the particular person had actual knowledge of each of the factual elements constituting the offence.
Language eng
Field of Research 180109 Corporations and Associations Law
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30002779

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: Law
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 380 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 07 Jul 2008, 08:34:15 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.