Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Young
[2003] QSC 123
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Young[2003] QSC 123
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Young[2003] QSC 123
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CIVIL JURISDICTION
MUIR J
No S745 of 2003
AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION | Applicant |
and | |
KEVIN YOUNG | First Respondent |
and | |
KATHLEEN CLAIR YOUNG | Second Respondent |
and | |
THE INVESTORS CLUB LIMITED (ACN 077 935 865) | Third Respondent |
and | |
LISSON PTY LTD (ACN 069 072 742) | Fourth Respondent |
and | |
SELF HELP INVESTORS GROUP PTY LTD (ACN 074 114 319) | Fifth Respondent |
and | |
CLUB LOANS PTY LTD (ACN 096 339 150) | Sixth Respondent |
BRISBANE
DATE 14/03/2003
JUDGMENT
HIS HONOUR: I order in terms of the draft initialled by me, copies of which will now be provided to you. I have a couple of observations to make.
The first is that if, on the part of the applicant, there is any disappointment in the limited scope of the order I have made, the applicant can take solace in the fact that, if I had made an order in the terms requested by it, it would not have applied to any of the participants in any of the subject schemes.
And a glance at the definition of each scheme in paragraph A where it is confined to the promotion of property developments to members of the third respondent will show why that is so. I did not, as it turned out, get a great deal of help from the document provided.
As for the respondents, it would certainly be desirable if they could curb what seems to be their natural tendency to disseminate misleading information, particularly in relation to the contents of pronouncements made in the Court. There are plenty of examples of that sort of conduct, or more appropriately, misconduct.
I have given liberty to apply, and one occasion in which that liberty might be able to be exercised is if the respondents persist in that form of conduct, in which case it may be necessary to make orders which are somewhat more draconian.
Before we depart I will invite you gentlemen to look at the text of that letter which I am requiring be despatched to see whether you notice any obvious defects in it. That is in paragraph 7B.
…