Search

ASIC to focus on compliance by unlisted disclosing entities

Focus: ASIC will undertake a review of compliance by unlisted disclosing entities
Services: Commercial
Date: 12 November 2008
Author: Geoff Cairns, Partner, Sydney
Dibbs Abbott Stillman Lawyers restructured on 1 March, 2009.
The Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra offices are now DibbsBarker.

In an industry stakeholder meeting earlier this year, ASIC announced that it will undertake a review of compliance by unlisted disclosing entities with their disclosure obligations under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act). In light of this review, ASIC will release stricter guidelines outlining obligations under the Act, along with likely further enforcement action. 

 

Who is affected?

Entities affected are those considered to be unlisted disclosing entities under the Act. These include:
  • companies which have issued securities under a prospectus or other disclosure document and the securities have been held by 100 or more persons at all items since the issue; and
  • registered managed investment schemes with 100 or more members who hold interests in the scheme following an offer made under a product disclosure statement (PDS). 

What are the obligations?

 
Currently, unlisted disclosing entities are required to adhere to 2 forms of disclosure (which are similar to those for listed entities):
  • a system of continuous disclosure (for example lodging half-yearly and annual reports); and
  • timely disclosure of “price sensitive information”, including information that:
    • is not generally available; and
    • a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price or value of the entity's securities.

ASIC has recognised that there is little guidance on the nature of “price sensitive information”, however, the reporting obligations are considered similar to those of listed entities under the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX).

Not all information outlined above is required to be disclosed. Exemptions include information which, is both confidential and not reasonably expected to be disclosed, and information which is either indefinite, or incomplete as part of a proposal or negotiation.
 

What you should do

 
ASIC is still undertaking its review in this area and the extent to which it will tighten its guidelines remains to be seen.

In the meantime, unlisted disclosing entities should make sure they are fully aware of their obligations in this area.  We recommend unlisted disclosing entities draft and implement a continuous disclosure policy which sets out materiality thresholds and information which requires disclosure under the Act.

__________________________________________________

If you would like assistance in complying with your corporate governance requirements, and in particular unlisted entities disclosure obligations, please contact:

Geoff Cairns
T: 61 2 8233 9570
E: geoff.cairns@dibbsbarker.com

The information in this document is provided for general guidance only. It is not legal advice, and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional legal or other advisors. No warranty is given to the correctness of the information contained in this document, or its suitability for use by you. To the fullest extent permitted by law, no liability is accepted by DibbsBarker for any statement or opinion, or for an error or omission or for any loss or damage suffered as a result of reliance on or use by any person of any material in the document.
 
This publication is copyright. Apart from  any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, it may only be reproduced for internal business purposes, and may not otherwise be copied, adapted, amended, published, communicated or otherwise made available to third parties, in whole or in part, in any form  or by any means, without the prior written consent of DibbsBarker.
Recent Publications
23 May 2013
A decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal sends a warning to financial service providers to ensure its officers make reasonable enquiries into any apparent inconsistencies in information provided in support of a loan application.
22 May 2013
Australian businesses are becoming increasingly conscious that innovation is essential for our country's future prosperity. In light of this, IP Australia's recently released Australian Intellectual Property Report provides some food for thought.
17 May 2013
A recent DibbsBarker article published in Proctor explains in some depth the written/mandatory final offer regimes for various personal injuries matters at the pre-proceedings stage and their interplay with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld).
Privacy Disclaimer Contact Us Site Map CLIENT & STAFF LogIN © 2010 DIBBSBARKER