Corporate law Brisbane

Prohibition on the acquisition of relevant interests

HomePrivate: BlogCommercial lawCorporate lawProhibition on the acquisition of relevant interests

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

2–3 minutes

Section 606 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corps Act) contains a prima facie prohibition against the acquisition of relevant interests in voting shares.

What is a relevant interest?

Relevant interest in relation to securities is defined in section 9 of the Corps Act as taking its meaning from section 608 and section 609.

Section 608 provides that a person has a relevant interest if they:

  • are the holder of the securities;
  • have the power to exercise or to control a right attached to securities; or
  • have the power to dispose of the securities;

Subsections 2 and 3 of section 608 further provide for what is broadly described as “grouping provisions” meaning that for the purposes of determining whether or not a person has a relevant interest, interests controlled through trusts and bodies corporate are included. The remainder of section 608 contains other requirements which, if satisfied will mean that a person has a relevant interest.

What is the threshold that applies?

The prohibition against the acquisition of a relevant interest contained in section 606 applies to:

  • listed companies;
  • an unlisted public company with more than 50 members;

Therefore, by exception it does not apply to unlisted public companies which have less than 50 members or proprietary limited companies.

Where the person acquires the interest through a transaction in relation to securities and because of the transaction a person’s voting power in the company increases:

  • from 20% or below to more than 20%; or
  • for a starting point that is above 20% and below 90%.

Note 3 to section 606 of the Corps Act provides that:

If the acquisition of relevant interests in an unlisted company with 50 or fewer members leads to the acquisition of a relevant interest in another company that is an unlisted company with more than 50 members, or a listed company, the acquisition is caught by this section because of its effect on that other company”.

There is also an implicit part of section 606 which prohibits the entering into a transaction which creates a relevant interest on behalf of a third party.

Exceptions

Section 611 of the Corps Act contains the exceptions to the acquisition of a relevant interest.

There are twenty (20) exceptions, notably subsection 9, known as the “creeping provisions” which allow a 3% creep in 6 months and section 7 which provides for approval by resolution of the general members of the company, subject to certain conditions. Refer to section 611 of the Corps Act for a complete list of exceptions.

Links and further references

Legislation

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s606

Cases

Australian Pipeline Limited v Alinta Limited [2007] FCAFC 55 – application for a declaration of contravention of s606

McMillan Properties Pty Ltd v W C Penfold Ltd and Anor [2001] NSWSC 1173 (11 December 2001) – a useful analysis of section 606 is conducted by Young CJ at 15

Viento Group Limited [2011] ATP 1 (13 January 2011)

Further information

If you need advice or further information about acquiring a relevant interest in voting shares, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about corporate and contract law

  • WIJOAV v Goldstone – shareholder oppression in a private equity context

    WIJOAV v Goldstone – shareholder oppression in a private equity context

    The recent case of WIJOAV Services Pty Ltd v Goldstone Private Equity Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 622 (WIJOAV v Goldstone) involved a claim of shareholder oppression under section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act).  The case established that a shareholder in a private equity fund may be oppressed by a co-investor where…

    Read more …

  • Federal Court dismisses continuous disclosure claim

    Federal Court dismisses continuous disclosure claim

    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…

    Read more …

  • Does your start-up meet the ESIC tax-offset criteria?

    Does your start-up meet the ESIC tax-offset criteria?

    Federal government introduced the Tax Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives for Innovation) Act 2016 (Cth) to provide tax incentives for investors in an eligible early stage innovation company (ESIC), including 20% up-front non-refundable tax offset and capital gains tax (CGT) exemption for all types of investors meeting criteria.

    Read more …

  • Valuing ESS Interests

    Valuing ESS Interests

    A company, whether listed or unlisted, can grant its employees an interest in its equity (ESS Interest), including through an employee share scheme (ESS) or employee share option plan (ESOP).  There are restrictions contained in both the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) and Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) (ITAA) that determine the price…

    Read more …

  • ESS vs ESOP – what’s the difference?

    ESS vs ESOP – what’s the difference?

    Employee share schemes (ESS) and employee share option plans (ESOP) are commonly used by corporations to incentivise employees and align performance with company growth by providing them with an interest in the company.  While the terms are often used interchangeably, they have distinct legal and structural differences under Australian law.  This article explains the key…

    Read more …

  • Disputed ESOP – Selak v National Tiles Co Pty Ltd

    Disputed ESOP – Selak v National Tiles Co Pty Ltd

    In the case of Selak v National Tiles, the Vic Supreme Court considered whether a company breached an option agreement governed by the terms of an Employee Share Option Plan (ESOP) by requiring an option holder to execute an undisclosed shareholders’ agreement as a condition of exercising vested options.  

    Read more …

  • Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corps Act) grants the Courts the power to award remedies under section 233, specifically designed to address situations of oppression within corporate entities under section 232.  These remedies, also known as the “Oppression Remedies”, aim to resolve situations where a company’s conduct unfairly prejudices its members or shareholders.  While primarily…

    Read more …

  • Directors’ obligations to comply with Accounting Standards

    Directors’ obligations to comply with Accounting Standards

    Directors are personally liable for ensuring their company operates in accordance with corporate governance and accounting standards.  Obligations contained in part 2M.2 and 2M.3 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) outline obligations for companies to keep financial records and prepare annual financial and director’s reports.  Sections 180 and 344 of the Corporations Act…

    Read more …

  • Accounting standards matter: the company’s obligation

    Accounting standards matter: the company’s obligation

    Australian accounting standards (Accounting Standards) are often considered solely the domain of auditors and accountants.  However, they are a crucial aspect of corporate law and governance in Australia.  For directors, officers, and their professional advisers, the key issue is not the technical details of the Accounting Standards, but rather their legal enforceability.  A failure to…

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend