ASIC has released a report outlining its recent
decisions on applications for relief from the corporate finance,
financial services and managed investment provisions of the Corporations Act (the Act) between 1 January and 31 May 2007. 

The report, Overview of decisions on relief applications (January to May 2007),
provides an overview of situations where ASIC has exercised, or refused
to exercise, its exemption and modification powers, from the financial
reporting, managed investment, takeovers, fundraising and financial
services provisions of the Act. 

The report also highlights instances where ASIC
decided to adopt a no-action position regarding specified
non-compliance with the provisions, and features an appendix detailing
the relief instruments it executed.

With less than 90 working days before the implementation of the Basel II Framework in Australia, APRA has released its proposed reporting
requirements (pdf) for authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs) under
the new Basel II capital adequacy regime.

APRA proposes to finalise and
issue the reporting standards, reporting forms and instruction guides
in late 2007, following the release of the full suite of finalised
Basel II prudential standards. The reporting standards will come into
effect at the same time as the Framework, on 1 January 2008; the first
submission of data will be for the period 1 January 2008 to 31 March
2008.

A recent speech by Bernie Egan, Program Director, Basel II Australian Prudential Regulation Authority provides useful background on the changes.

In Cook and Anor v Permanent
Mortgages Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 219 the New South Wales Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by the defendant borrowers against the relief they were given from an unjust loan contract in their original trial in Permanent Mortgages v Cook.

The trial judge relieved the borrowers from the obligation to pay to the mortgagee fees associated with entry into the transaction, from payment of
interest at a default rate of 13.8%pa (5% more than the ordinary interest of 8.8% per annum), and from
any obligation to pay the mortgagee’s costs and expenses following
default.

On appeal the borrowers sought relief from the obligation to pay even the ordinary interest at the rate of
8.8% per annum.

The Court of Appeal rejected that claim and stated "Relieving them from payment of
interest to the respondent would do more than restore them to their previous
position. It would improve their position."

However the Court of Appeal ordered that the mortgagee pay ninety per cent of the borrower’s trial costs and fifty per cent of appeal costs.