Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Channic Pty Ltd (No 4)

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) filed a case against Channic Pty Ltd, involving alleged breaches of consumer protection laws under the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001. The case also involved a claim against Channic for engaging in unconscionable conduct, and the alleged unconscionability of credit contracts entered into with certain consumers. The court was tasked with determining whether the contraventions alleged by ASIC had indeed occurred, and if so, what relief should be granted.

The court examined the evidence presented to determine if there were contraventions of specific sections of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009, including sections 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 121, 123, 128, 129, 130, 131, and 133, as well as section 12CB of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 76 of the National Credit Code. The court also needed to decide if Channic had engaged in unconscionable conduct and whether the credit contracts were unjust. The court considered the evidence and submissions from both parties, taking into account the admissions made by the respondents and the evidence presented in affidavit form by the applicant.

In its judgment, the court found that Channic had contravened sections 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 121, and 123 of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009, and that Channic had engaged in unconscionable conduct under section 12CB of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001. The court also found that each credit contract was unjust under section 76 of the National Credit Code. However, the court did not find contraventions beyond the admissions made by the respondents in relation to Mr Gordon and Ms Raymond, as the respondents were not able to test the evidence by cross-examination and demonstrate that ASIC had failed to prove the alleged contraventions. The court directed ASIC to submit proposed declarations and orders within 14 days, reserved the costs of the proceedings for later determination, and instructed the parties to file submissions on costs within 21 days. The court also decided that the question of determining a pecuniary penalty for the contraventions would be dealt with in a separate proceeding.

ORDERS:
1. The applicant is directed to submit to the Court within 14 days proposed declarations and orders to be made in conformity with the findings in the reasons for judgment published today.
2. The costs of and incidental to the proceeding are reserved for later determination.
3. The parties are directed to file submissions in relation to the costs of the proceedings within 21 days.
4. The question of the determination of a pecuniary penalty in respect of the various contraventions is to be determined in a separate proceeding.