Judge baulks at record $35m Westpac fine
I must admit I don't like criticising ASIC but sometimes I
just can't help it!
How can ASIC hope to secure a record $35 million for breaches
of the National Credit Act, which is twice as large as the previous largest
fine, when they put forward agreed facts which state that Westpac's conduct was
due to an "innocent mistake"?
ASIC has to ensure that the agreed facts support the proposed
penalty and by far the biggest consideration in the severity of a pecuniary
penalty is whether the conduct was intentional or not - even recklessness can
support a significant penalty.
However, ASIC are now facing the distinct possibility that
Justice Perram will not accept the agreed penalty of $35 million for an
"innocent mistake" and instead impose a significantly lower penalty.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment