Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Robyn a C Cochrane and 1Ors

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) brought proceedings against Robyn a C Cochrane and another individual, asserting that the first defendant had breached an enforceable undertaking given to ASIC. This undertaking was intended to restrain the defendant from providing independent financial advice without a valid licence. ASIC sought an injunction to prevent the defendant from offering such advice, a compensatory payment for the loss or damage incurred due to the breach, and a freezing order to immobilise the defendant's assets. The case was heard in a relevant Australian court, which had to determine whether the defendant had indeed violated the enforceable undertaking and, if so, the appropriate remedies.

The court was tasked with resolving several legal issues, including whether the defendant had contravened the enforceable undertaking by providing financial advice without the requisite licence. Another issue was the extent of the compensation ASIC was entitled to claim for losses attributable to the breach. The court also needed to decide whether a freezing order was necessary to prevent the dissipation of the defendant's assets and the quantum of such an order. Additionally, the court had to consider the implications of the defendant's absence from the proceedings and the appropriate costs order.

The court found that the first defendant had breached the enforceable undertaking by offering financial advice without a licence, thereby warranting the injunction sought by ASIC. The court determined the appropriate compensatory payment for the losses suffered by ASIC due to the breach. It was also concluded that a freezing order was necessary to prevent the defendant from disposing of assets that could be used to satisfy any judgment. Given the defendant's absence from the proceedings, the court awarded indemnity costs to ASIC. The court ordered the defendant to pay a specified amount in compensation and directed the freezing of certain assets. Furthermore, the defendant was ordered to cover ASIC's costs.