Leadenhall Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Securities and Investments Commission

Leadenhall Australia Pty Ltd sought judicial review of a decision of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to refuse to issue a notice of beneficial ownership of a company. ASIC had made the decision in relation to a request made by Leadenhall under s 672B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Leadenhall had not received reasons for ASIC’s decision pursuant to s 28 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) (AAT Act) and applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for review of ASIC’s decision. Leadenhall sought an order that ASIC produce documents it had obtained from a third party in the course of making its decision. ASIC resisted the application on the basis that the documents were protected by legal professional privilege and confidentiality orders.

The court found that the documents were protected by legal professional privilege. The court found that ASIC had not breached the implied undertaking contained in Practice Direction 5.2 of the AAT by using the documents in the course of making its decision. The court found that Leadenhall had not established that the use of the documents was not in the proper exercise of ASIC’s functions or powers.

Leadenhall Australia Pty Ltd’s application for an order that ASIC produce documents was dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the proceedings, fixed in the amount of $6,083.70.