Are ASIC’s civil penalty proceedings against SQM Research Pty Ltd (AFSL 421913) regulatory overreach or a reinterpretation of the law?
They are neither; the regulator is simply applying established principles to a new context where the alleged failures relate to core licensee obligations.
Before proceeding, it’s important to acknowledge that allegations are not facts, and SQM intends to robustly defend ASIC’s allegations.
ASIC alleges breaches of s912A(1)(a) of the Corporations Act and ss12DB(1)(a) and (e) of the ASIC Act. While we haven’t seen proceedings against a research house before, the themes are familiar. Cases like Lanterne and RI Advice, together with long-standing gatekeeper speeches, all show ASIC’s willingness to treat s912A as an operational, outcomes-based obligation.
Viewed in this context, the SQM proceedings may feel unprecedented, but they are consistent with ASIC’s stated enforcement philosophy. Researchers have not been spared until now because of regulatory timidity; a more likely explanation is that ASIC has not previously encountered conduct it believed met the factual threshold for enforcement under s912A.