Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 JULY 2010

ASIC Charges Opes Prime Directors

Norton Rose Fulbright Australia
Explore more from Norton Rose Fulbright Australia

In early January 2010, ASIC arrested and charged three directors of Opes Prime Stockbroking Limited (OPSL) and Opes Prime Group Limited (OPGL) over their roles in the collapse of the failed stockbroking group.

AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
Carey Lynn
Carey Lynn
Jessica Edwards
Jessica Edwards
Author LinkedIn connections

In early January 2010, ASIC arrested and charged three directors of Opes Prime Stockbroking Limited (OPSL) and Opes Prime Group Limited (OPGL) over their roles in the collapse of the failed stockbroking group.

The group was placed into receivership in March 2008 with over 650 clients and creditors owed approximately $630 million. A Scheme of Arrangement has been approved for creditors.

The three directors are Laurie Emini, Julian Smith and Anthony Blumberg. Each has been charged with offences for breaches of their duties as directors of both OPSL and OPGL. The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions is prosecuting the directors on behalf of ASIC.

ASIC alleges that shortly before the collapse of the group the directors signed financial documents with financiers to obtain a loan for OPSL and OPGL and pledged the companies' assets as security to meet the obligations of a third group company and in doing so they:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Video

Misrepresentation In Commercial Contracts Under Australian Law

Misrepresentation in commercial contracts can expose businesses to significant legal and financial consequences, particularly where inaccurate statements, misleading disclosures, or unrealistic forecasts induce entry into a transaction. Under Australian law, parties may pursue remedies through both common law misrepresentation claims and statutory misleading or deceptive conduct provisions under the Australian Consumer Law, with potential outcomes including rescission, damages, and compensation orders.
AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
Stonegate Legal
Stonegate Legal
Article

Force Majeure Clause Risks In Australia Explained

Force majeure clauses in Australian contracts determine whether extraordinary events can suspend, delay, or excuse contractual obligations, but relief depends entirely on precise wording and strict compliance with notice and mitigation requirements. Understanding when businesses can legally invoke force majeure versus when they risk breach of contract claims is critical for managing commercial disruption.
AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
Stonegate Legal
Stonegate Legal
Article

Frustration Of Contract Explained: Can You Legally Walk Away?

Frustration of contract is widely misunderstood in Australian law, with many assuming contracts automatically end when circumstances become difficult or expensive. This guide examines the strict legal test applied by Australian courts, explaining when supervening events truly discharge contractual obligations and why financial hardship, increased costs, and commercial difficulties typically fall short of the frustration threshold.
AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
Stonegate Legal
Stonegate Legal
Article

What Is The Liability Under A Contractor Agreement In Australia?

A contractor agreement determines who pays when work goes wrong. Independent contractors carry their own commercial risk, unlike employees, so the agreement allocates that risk in detail. Liability commonly arises from breach of contract, intellectual property infringement, and breaches of confidentiality. Indemnities, liability caps and insurance requirements are the three tools that allocate it. Australian law puts limits on that allocation. Consumer guarantees under the Australian Consumer Law apply automatically, and no contract can exclude them.
AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
LegalVision
LegalVision
Article

Dividend Payments - Key Issues For Australian Company Directors

Dividends are a common way for companies to distribute value to shareholders, but whether to declare or pay a dividend is not simply a commercial decision. Directors must ensure that any dividend complies with the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act), the company’s constitution and relevant governance requirements, while considering their duties to the company and its creditors.
AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
Bartier Perry Solicitors
Bartier Perry Solicitors
Article

Shareholder Oppression - Protecting Your Rights As A Shareholder

When you invest your time, money and energy into a company, you expect to be treated fairly and to have your rights as a shareholder respected. But what happens when those rights are ignored, or worse, actively undermined? Shareholder oppression is a serious issue that can have significant financial implications. If you suspect that your rights are being compromised, it’s important to act promptly to protect your interests.
AustraliaCorporate/Commercial Law
Bartier Perry Solicitors
Bartier Perry Solicitors