Schedule A Free Call

ASIC & Enforcement

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Oztures Trading Pty Ltd [2026]

ASIC v Oztures Trading Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 509 examines Binance Australia Derivatives’ systemic misclassification of retail clients as wholesale clients or sophisticated investors. The decision highlights the need for legally valid onboarding controls, Australian-law-specific training and effective retail product protections.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (Retail Cases Omnibus) [2025] FCA 1593

ASIC v ANZ (Retail Cases Omnibus) [2025] FCA 1593 examines systemic failures across hardship notices, bonus interest and deceased-estate administration. The decision highlights the need for reliable customer-outcomes systems, accurate records, effective monitoring and board oversight of recurring operational compliance failures.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v National Australia Bank [2025] FCA 947

ASIC v National Australia Bank [2025] FCA 947 examines systemic failures to provide timely hardship responses to financially vulnerable customers. The decision highlights the need for reliable workflow controls, daily monitoring of continuing contraventions and effective remediation where statutory notices are missed.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Firstmac Limited (Penalty Hearing) [2025] FCA 12

ASIC v Firstmac Ltd (Penalty Hearing) [2025] FCA 12 is a significant design and distribution obligations decision concerning inadequate target market controls. The judgment confirms that product issuers and distributors must operationalise target market determinations through effective screening, staff training, documented procedures and ongoing monitoring.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v DOD Bookkeeping Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (No 2) [2025] FCA 395

ASIC v DOD Bookkeeping Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2025] FCA 395 examines systemic failures in SMSF property advice, vertically integrated conflicts and transaction-linked adviser bonuses. The decision highlights licensee responsibility for client-specific advice, remuneration governance and monitoring of predetermined advice models.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v LGSS Pty Ltd (No 3) [2025] FCA 205

ASIC v LGSS Pty Ltd (No 3) [2025] FCA 205 sets an important greenwashing enforcement benchmark for superannuation trustees and investment managers. The decision confirms that ESG claims must reflect actual portfolio holdings, including indirect exposures, and that misleading sustainability statements can attract substantial penalties without proof of direct financial loss.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Auto & General Insurance Company Limited [2025] FCAFC 76

ASIC v Auto & General Insurance Company Ltd [2025] FCAFC 76 clarifies how unfair contract terms are assessed in insurance contracts. The Full Court emphasised proper construction, transparency, legitimate interests and the importance of drafting clear, proportionate customer notification obligations.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v BPS Financial Pty Ltd (Penalty) [2026] FCA 18

ASIC v BPS Financial Pty Ltd (Penalty) [2026] FCA 18 has broader implications for crypto, fintech and digital payment businesses. The decision reinforces functional product regulation, strict licensing expectations, personal responsibility for marketing claims and the need to substantiate statements about liquidity, merchant growth and regulatory approval.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v United Super Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1453

In ASIC v United Super Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1453, the Federal Court imposed $23.5 million in penalties over unreasonable delays in death, terminal illness and disability claims, together with breach-reporting failures. The decision reinforces trustee accountability for outsourced claims handling, data quality, remediation and timely escalation.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Westpac Banking Corporation [2026] FCA 651

In ASIC v Westpac Banking Corporation [2026] FCA 651, the Federal Court imposed a $26 million penalty for systemic failures in Westpac’s online financial hardship processes. The decision highlights the need for end-to-end complaint capture, reliable system controls, timely hardship decisions and effective protection against premature enforcement.
Read Case Insight

Step 1 of 8 - Your Role

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Assess your ASIC exposure

Answer a few targeted questions to identify where your compliance may not stand up under ASIC review.

Takes less than 2 minutes. No preparation required.

What best describes your role?