April « 2006 « Australian Regulatory Compliance Review from Langes+ Lawyers

April 6, 2006

Consumer credit ecommerce amendments

The Consumer Credit and Trade Measurement Amendment Bill 2006 (pdf) was introduced into Queensland Parliament on 28 March 2006.

The objectives of the Bill in relation to credit matters are to:
• facilitate the application of the electronic transactions legislation in each State and Territory to the Consumer Credit Code;
• ensure that consumer protection is not diminished as a result of a debtor transacting in an electronic environment; and
• extend the sunset clause in relation to the mandatory comparison rate regime in the Consumer Credit Code by one year to 30 June 2007 to enable a review of that regime to be completed.

UPDATE: Although it is not possible to release the Regulations prior to the Bill
being assented it is likely that the exemptions from electronic communication that were proposed in conjunction with the Bill will be adopted in the Regulations. These were:

a guarantee under section 9
a copy of a guarantee under section 52(1)(a)
a copy of a credit contract under section 52(1)(B);
a copy of a contract document under section 54(2)(a);
a notice of particulars of change under section 56(1)(a);
a default notice under section 80(1);
a default notice under section 80(2);
information provided to the occupier under section 91(1)(b);
a request for entry under section 24(a);
a consent to enter premises under section 24(c);
a notice under section 94(1);
a demand on the supplier under section 120(5)(a);
a demand on the supplier under section 120(6)(a);
a notice of intention to repossess under section 156(1);
a
transaction on which duty is only charged under the laws of a
jurisdiction if the transaction is effected or evidenced by an
instrument in hard copy form;
an instrument on which duty is only charged under the laws of a jurisdiction if the instrument is in hard copy form.

Print This Post

Posted 6th April 2006 by David Jacobson in Financial Services

April 5, 2006

Discrimination in Financial and Work-Related Entitlements and Benefits

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission has announced it will conduct a
National Inquiry into discrimination against same-sex couples in accessing financial and work-related entitlements.

The Inquiry will conduct an audit of Commonwealth, State and Territory laws to develop a full list of circumstances in which same-sex couples and their children may be denied financial and/or work-related benefits and entitlements that heterosexual couples enjoy. The Inquiry will also collect individual stories about the impact of these laws on people in same-sex relationships.

The laws considered by the Inquiry will include laws dealing with:

Workplace leave entitlements
Social security benefits
Tax concessions
Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme
Superannuation entitlements
Workers’ compensation
Veterans’ pensions and entitlements
Parliamentary entitlements
Judicial pensions
Inheritance

How to make submissions

Print This Post

Posted 5th April 2006 by David Jacobson in Business Planning

National Do Not Call Register to be established

Following on from a Discussion Paper last year, the Minister for
Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Helen
Coonan, has announced that a national, legislated Do Not Call register will be created in 2007 to protect
consumers from nuisance telemarketing phone calls.

The Government expects that there
will be one million registrations in the first week of operation and
four million after the Register’s first year.

The Register will apply to all telemarketers operating in
Australia, as well as those overseas telemarketers who represent
Australian companies. Enforcement
options will include warnings, fines, formal directions and financial
penalties.

The legislation will also establish national minimum contact standards for telemarketers.The standards will cover permitted calling hours, minimum
information requirements and termination of calls.

The register will be open to individuals and small businesses who can opt out from receiving unsolicited telemarketing
calls. Once a telephone number is registered, it will be prohibited for
telemarketers to contact that number.

A limited range of exemptions will apply, for example, to charity groups
and people undertaking social research. Exemptions will also apply to
companies with an existing business relationship with an individual,
for example with existing accounts or contracts.

Individuals and small businesses will not be required to pay
a fee for registering their telephone numbers. Telemarketers will
contribute to the costs of running the scheme through the payment of
subscription fees to access the register.

Print This Post

Posted 5th April 2006 by David Jacobson in Privacy

April 2, 2006

Managing conflicts of interest in financial services: ASIC sues Citigroup

Since ASIC issued PS 181 there has been discussion about how it would be applied: ASIC’s action against Citigroup Global Markets Australia Pty Ltd (Citigroup) gives us the first example.

ASIC says that Citigroup breached the conflicts policy and the law in not disclosing to Toll that it was trading in Patrick’s shares on its own account whilst advising Toll.

ASIC has alleged that Citigroup:

* did not have in place adequate arrangements for the management of conflicts between its own interests and the interests of its client, Toll;

* engaged in unconscionable conduct in relation to financial services;

* engaged in proprietary trading on the basis of inside information; and

* did not have in operation arrangements that could reasonably be expected to ensure that inside information was not communicated to the Citigroup employee who traded in Patrick shares for the benefit of Citigroup.

Citigroup acted as an adviser to Toll Holdings Limited (Toll) in its $4.6 billion takeover bid for Patrick Corporation Limited (Patrick) announced on Monday 22 August 2005.

ASIC’s investigation into Citigroup identified substantial proprietary trading (trading on its own account) by Citigroup in Patrick securities on 19 August 2005, the last business day prior to Toll making an announcement of the bid to the market.

ASIC is seeking, among other things, the following declarations and orders:

* declarations that Citigroup breached both the ‘conflicts of interest’ and ‘insider trading’ provisions of the Corporations Act (the Act);

* orders requiring Citigroup to comply with s 912A(1)(aa) of the Act by putting in place adequate procedures for dealing with conflicts of interest;

* injunctions restraining Citigroup from engaging in a breach of s 12CA of the ASIC Act by trading in securities on its own account while acting for clients to whom Citigroup owed duties in relation to the price of those securities;

* orders under s 12GLA of the ASIC Act, requiring Citigroup to undertake certain action, including community service or education; and

* orders that Citigroup pay a pecuniary penalty to the Commonwealth for a contravention of s 1043A(1) of the Act.

UPDATE: Read the statement of claim and trial submissions

UPDATE 28 June 2007: Decision: ASIC’s claims fail

Print This Post

Posted 2nd April 2006 by David Jacobson in Compliance, Financial Services