Hutchison and Australian Securities and Investments Commission
Case
•
[2017] AATA 1419
•7 September 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Hutchison and Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2017] AATA 1419
[2017] AATA 1419
7 September 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a stay of a decision made by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) against Mr. Hutchison, pending the final hearing of his review before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The dispute centred on the likelihood of Mr. Hutchison committing further breaches of financial services law and the accuracy of the primary facts found by ASIC.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether to grant a stay of ASIC's decision, which had imposed a permanent ban on Mr. Hutchison. In considering this application, the Tribunal had to assess the applicant's prospects of success on the substantive review, the potential for repetition of misconduct, and the serious consequences that would arise if the ban were not stayed.
Deputy President Rayment P reasoned that the applicant had an arguable case regarding the findings of his character and the likelihood of future misconduct, noting that the primary facts themselves would be genuinely in issue. Coupled with the significant lapse of time since the original misconduct and the absence of evidence of further concerning matters, the Tribunal considered it desirable to grant a stay. The stay was made subject to conditions, including notification to clients, direct payment of fees to a specified company, and monthly reconciliation and reporting to ASIC by that company.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether to grant a stay of ASIC's decision, which had imposed a permanent ban on Mr. Hutchison. In considering this application, the Tribunal had to assess the applicant's prospects of success on the substantive review, the potential for repetition of misconduct, and the serious consequences that would arise if the ban were not stayed.
Deputy President Rayment P reasoned that the applicant had an arguable case regarding the findings of his character and the likelihood of future misconduct, noting that the primary facts themselves would be genuinely in issue. Coupled with the significant lapse of time since the original misconduct and the absence of evidence of further concerning matters, the Tribunal considered it desirable to grant a stay. The stay was made subject to conditions, including notification to clients, direct payment of fees to a specified company, and monthly reconciliation and reporting to ASIC by that company.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Stay of Proceedings
-
Appeal
-
Breach
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Hutchison v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2018] FCA 1002
Cases Citing This Decision
1
Hutchison v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2018] FCA 1002
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0