Goodman v Australian Securities and Investments Commission

The case of Goodman v Australian Securities and Investments Commission involved the applicant, a registered company auditor, challenging an application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to the Board for his registration as a company auditor to be cancelled. The applicant signed a report to the members of The Satellite Group (TSG) in 2000, stating that a review of TSG's financial statements had been conducted but did not express an opinion as it was not an audit. ASIC contended that the applicant failed to carry out or perform adequately and properly the duties of an auditor in relation to the review of TSG's financial report for the half-year ended 31 December 1999. The applicant sought an order quashing the Board's rulings and a declaration that the allegations against him were incapable of amounting to a failure to carry out or perform adequately and properly a duty required by the Corporations Act 2001.

The court was required to decide whether the applicant's review of TSG's financial report constituted carrying out or performing the duties of an auditor. The court examined the sources of its jurisdiction and power to grant the relief sought by the application, including under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) and the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). The court also considered the proper construction of subsection 1292(1) of the Corporations Act 2001, which provides the Board with the power to cancel or suspend the registration of a person as an auditor if they have failed to carry out or perform adequately and properly the duties of an auditor.

The court found that the applicant's review of TSG's financial report did not call for him to carry out or perform the duties of an auditor. The court held that the applicant's report made it clear that it was not an audit and did not express an opinion. The court also found that the applicant's conduct did not amount to a failure to carry out or perform adequately and properly the duties of an auditor. The court dismissed the applicant's application and ordered that he pay the respondents' costs.

In summary, the court found that the applicant's review of TSG's financial report did not amount to carrying out or performing the duties of an auditor and dismissed the applicant's application for an order of review. The court also ordered that the applicant pay the respondents' costs.