Mackay Chapman June ASIC Update

In this month’s ASIC update:

‍

• Major beauty and fashion retailers penalised over late financial reporting
• Financial complaints data receives transparency boost
• Insider trading case against former Big Un CFO discontinued
• ASIC seeks to simplify financial reporting rules
• Westpac ordered to pay $26 million over hardship failures
• Fake crypto trading platforms targeting investors
• ASIC appeals Federal Court decision in Nuix proceedings
• $33.5 million penalty imposed on Snaffle operator

‍

More on each of the above below. 

‍

Major beauty and fashion retailers penalised over late financial reporting

ASIC has issued infringement notices totalling $594,000 against the Australian operators of Zara, H&M and Sephora for allegedly failing to lodge financial reports on time.

Each company paid a $198,000 infringement notice relating to overdue financial reports for the 2024 or 2025 financial year. Payment of an infringement notice is not an admission of liability, but avoids ASIC potentially taking further action.  These actions form part of ASIC's broader enforcement campaign targeting late and non-lodgement of financial reports.

The regulator has made financial reporting compliance a key enforcement priority and has now issued more than $4.5 million in infringement notices since launching its surveillance program in 2025. 

For directors and company officers, the message is increasingly difficult to ignore: financial reporting obligations remain firmly on ASIC's enforcement agenda.

Financial complaints data receives transparency boost

ASIC has updated its Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) dashboard with complaint data covering July to December 2025 and introduced new tools designed to improve transparency across the financial services sector.

The updated dashboard now includes demographic insights showing complaint trends by age, gender and location, alongside downloadable datasets that allow firms, advisers and researchers to benchmark complaint handling performance against industry peers.

Insider trading case against former Big Un CFO discontinued

Criminal proceedings against former Big Un CFO Andrew Corner have been discontinued following a hung jury in a five-week insider trading trial.

The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions elected not to pursue a retrial after considering the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth. ASIC has confirmed it now considers the matter finalised.  This comes after the guilty plea entered by former Big Un CEO Richard Evans earlier this year.

Not all high-profile market misconduct cases result in convictions, even after lengthy investigations and prosecutions. 

However, enforcement scrutiny around insider trading and continuous disclosure remains an ASIC enforcement priority.

ASIC seeks to simplify financial reporting rules

ASIC is consulting on a proposal to consolidate 17 separate financial reporting and auditing relief instruments into two streamlined legislative instruments.

The move forms part of ASIC's broader regulatory simplification agenda and aims to make relief provisions easier to locate, interpret and apply. The proposed instruments would bring together a wide range of existing reporting and auditing exemptions without materially changing the underlying policy settings.

For reporting entities, auditors and advisers, the proposal may reduce complexity and improve accessibility, particularly where multiple relief instruments currently need to be considered simultaneously.

Westpac ordered to pay $26 million over hardship failures

The Federal Court has imposed a $26 million penalty on Westpac after finding the bank failed to properly respond to more than 200 customer hardship requests over a six-year period.

The affected customers were experiencing financial difficulties arising from circumstances such as illness, domestic violence, natural disasters and unemployment. In some cases, hardship requests went unanswered entirely, leading to adverse credit outcomes and debt recovery action.

The Court found Westpac's failures stemmed from inadequate systems and operational shortcomings. The conduct was described as grossly negligent. 

Fake crypto trading platforms targeting investors

ASIC has issued a fresh warning about scammers using messaging apps and social media channels to direct investors to fraudulent cryptocurrency trading platforms.

The scams typically begin with stock tips or investment groups on platforms such as WhatsApp, before victims are encouraged to invest through sophisticated-looking trading platforms displaying fake profits and fabricated trading activity.

ASIC has also highlighted the growing exposure of younger Australians to crypto-related advertising and investment content on social media. Businesses, advisers and investors should remain vigilant and undertake appropriate due diligence before engaging with unfamiliar investment opportunities.

ASIC appeals Federal Court decision in Nuix proceedings

ASIC has appealed the Federal Court's decision dismissing its case against software company Nuix over alleged continuous disclosure breaches and misleading market statements.

While the regulator is not appealing findings relating to individual directors, it argues the Court made errors in its assessment of the company's disclosure obligations and market communications.

The appeal is likely to be closely watched by listed companies and directors, while the decision could provide important guidance on continuous disclosure obligations.

$33.5 million penalty imposed on Snaffle operator

The Federal Court has ordered a $33.5 million penalty against Walker Stores, the former operator of online retailer Snaffle, for unlawfully overcharging consumers under credit contracts.

The Court found more than 38,000 contracts incorrectly calculated interest, resulting in almost $20 million in excess charges. Certain contracts also exceeded statutory caps on credit costs, with effective rates reaching more than double the legal limit.

The contents of this article do not constitute legal advice and it is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such.  It is designed and intended as general information in summary form, current at the time of publication, for general informational purposes only.  You should seek legal advice or other professional advice in relation to any particular legal matters you or your organisation may have.

‍