Litigation and dispute resolution

Federal Court dismisses continuous disclosure claim

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

3–5 minutes

The Federal Court recently dismissed Australia Securities and Investment Commission’s (ASIC) claim in Australian Securities and Investment Commission v Nuix Limited [2026] FCA 490 (ASIC v Nuix) that Nuix Limited breached its obligations under section 674 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act).  Nuix Limited (Nuix) successfully contested ASIC’s allegation that it had breached ASX Listing Rule 3.1A, which requires the continuous disclosure of information related to the financial performance of an entity.

Summary of continuous disclosure obligation

Continuous disclosure requires Australian listed public companies to publish information about matters that could materially affect their share price in a timely manner and in accordance with ASX Listing Rules and other relevant legislation.[1]

Section 674(2)(c)-(d) of the Corporations Actstates that if:

  • the information is not generally available; and
  • a reasonable person would expect the information, if it were generally available, to have a material effect on the price or value of ED securities of the entity;

the entity must notify the market operator of that information“.[2]

Background to ASIC v Nuix

ASIC alleged that from 18 January to 15 February 2021, Nuix contravened section 674(2) of the Corporations Act by:

  • failing to disclose the 2021 financial year annualised contract value (1HFY21 ACV) result to the ASX;
  • where Nuix was aware of the result;
  • the result was not generally available; and
  • a reasonable person would expect the result to have a material effect on the price of Nuix’s shares.
  • ASIC further claimed Nuix published misleading financial forecasts and that Nuix’s directors had breached their duties by letting the forecasts reach the public.[3] 

The two (2) key issues for determination by the Court were whether the information was disclosable, under ASX Listing Rule 3.1A and if so whether Nuix had contravened its continuous disclosure obligations under section 674(2) of the Corporations Act.  Secondly whether Nuix’s failure to disclose the 1HFY21 ACV and publication of financial forecasts breached the laws relating to misleading and deceptive conduct or directors’ duties.

Application of ASX listing rules

The continuous disclosure obligation for listed companies, Listing Rule 3.1applies:

“Once an entity is or becomes aware of any information concerning it that a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price or value of the entity’s securities, the entity must immediately tell ASX that information”.[4]

Listing Rule 3.1A provides an exception to this rule if:

  • Disclosing the information would breach a law; or
  • The information concerns and incomplete proposal or negotiation; or
  • The information comprises matters of supposition, or is insufficiently definite to warrant disclosure; or
  • The information is generated for internal management purposes; or
  • The information is a trade secret; AND
  • The information is confidential; AND
  • A reasonable person would not expect the information to be disclosed.

Application in ASIC v Nuix

The Court dismissed ASIC’s claim of breach of continuous disclosure, as it was not persuaded that a reasonable person would have expected disclosure of the 1HFY21 ACV results.  Therefore, the exemption applied and Nuix could not be said to have contravened its continuous disclosure obligations.[5]

The Court also dismissed the misleading and deceptive conduct claims, finding that Nuix maintained reasonable grounds for its financial forecasts.  The directors’ duties contraventions were accordingly dismissed as these claims “fell away” after no primary contraventions were established.[6]

Key takeaways

Discussions surrounding section 674 of the Corporations Act and the ASX Listing Rules related to continuous disclosure, in the context of ASIC v Nuix, clarify their application.  It is important that directors of listed public companies, are aware of their continuous disclosure obligations including how to identify whether information is or is not required to be disclosed.

Links and further references

Legislation

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

Cases

Australian Securities and Investment Commission v Nuix Limited [2026] FCA 490

Further information

If you need advice on fulfilling your company’s obligations under the Corporations Act, contact us for a confidential and obligation‑free discussion.

Doyles Recommended TMT Lawyer 2024

[1] ASIC, Handling Corporate Information.

[2] Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 674(2).

[3] Australian Securities and Investment Commission v Nuix Limited [2026] FCA 490 at [3]-[5].

[4] ASX Listing Rule 3.1, page 301.

[5] Australian Securities and Investment Commission v Nuix Limited [2026] FCA 490 Justice Goodman at 786 – 788.

[6] Australian Securities and Investment Commission v Nuix Limited [2026] FCA 490Justice Goodman At paragraphs 979-995.


Related insights

  • Directors’ Duties in Australia

    Directors’ Duties in Australia

    Directors of unlisted companies in Australia have a range of legal obligations to uphold. This article examines the duties of directors, as well as the potential penalties for breaching them. Discover more about the three sources of law that apply and how to ensure compliance.

    Read more …

  • What is a Joint Venture – Australian law

    What is a Joint Venture – Australian law

    Creating a Joint Venture in Australia requires careful consideration of structure, assets, responsibilities and rights. It can range from unincorporated to fully incorporated, and must ensure success for all Participants.

    Read more …

  • Is your ACN on all your public documents?

    Is your ACN on all your public documents?

    Discover the requirements and penalties for displaying an Australian Company Number (ACN) on public documents. Find out what constitutes a public document and how to ensure your business is compliant. Click through to learn more.

    Read more …

  • Top 7 mistakes made in Shareholders’ Agreements

    Top 7 mistakes made in Shareholders’ Agreements

    This article outlines the top 7 mistakes made in Shareholders’ Agreements, covering common pitfalls such as not having an agreement at all, failing to consider a tailored constitution, and overlooking the impact of future events. It provides insights into the importance of having a well-thought-out agreement to protect shareholders and ensure the long-term success of…

    Read more …

  • Commercialising intellectual property assets

    Commercialising intellectual property assets

    Discover the various ways to unlock the commercial value of your Intellectual Property (IP). Learn about intellectual property licensing, intellectual property sale and subsequent licensing, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions and spin out entities.

    Read more …

  • Strategy over structure

    Strategy over structure

    Strategic planning is essential for new or expanding businesses. It can improve operating efficiencies, provide clarity on company culture, better customer relations, and protect personal/business assets. A comprehensive plan can drive better success for the business and give external stakeholders the best chance to offer value.

    Read more …

  • Licence Agreements to exploit IP

    Licence Agreements to exploit IP

    Discover the benefits of licensing your intellectual property and how to maximise its commercial value. Learn about the rights and permissions you can grant to another party, and the payments or royalties you can receive in exchange.

    Read more …

  • How large must a company be to list on the ASX?

    How large must a company be to list on the ASX?

    ASX released consultation paper on listing eligibility requirements. Learn more about the profits, assets, and shareholder spread tests needed to determine if your organisation is suitable to list on the stock exchange.

    Read more …

  • Tailored Constitutions vs Shareholders’ Agreements

    Tailored Constitutions vs Shareholders’ Agreements

    Discover the differences between a Constitution and a Shareholders’ Agreement and how they can be tailored to a Company’s needs. Find out why it may be beneficial to have both documents in place and explore related articles for further information.

    Read more …

Related cases

  • Reiche v Neometals Ltd [2026] FCAFC 53

    CORPORATIONS – appeal from judgment of single judge concerning whistleblower protections under pt 9.4AAA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the “Corps Act”) – where primary judge dismissed application for compensation and other remedies under s 1317AE of the Corps Act – where respondent admitted to causing detriment to appellant by making his role redundant and terminating…

  • Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union v Opal Packaging Australia Pty Ltd [2026] FCAFC 54

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – appeal from a decision of this Court concerning the construction of clause 16.3 of the Opal Fibre Packaging National Enterprise Agreement 2022 – whether the alternative dispute resolution clause which referred to the “status quo” remaining precluded the respondent from changing the operation of its random drug and alcohol testing practices

  • Brisbane Club v Commissioner of Taxation (No 2) [2026] FCA 521

    INCOME TAX — Capital Gains Tax — Cost base — Whether money paid should be included in the cost base of the relevant Building or Second Sublease— Where money paid pursuant to a particular clause of the Deed — Where parties to the Second Sublease were not the same parties to the Deed — Interpretation…


Posted

in

, ,
Send this to a friend