You’ve got nothing to lose: Myer, Babcock & Brown, continuous disclosure obligations and securities litigation | Practical Law

You’ve got nothing to lose: Myer, Babcock & Brown, continuous disclosure obligations and securities litigation | Practical Law

This article discusses two cases which consider, in different circumstances, what information is subject to continuous disclosure obligations in the context of claims of loss flowing from indirect, market-based causation. The decisions are both decisions of the Federal Court of Australia, being Masters v Lombe [2019] FCA 1720 (arising from the liquidation of Babcock & Brown Limited) and TPT Patrol Pty ltd v Myer Holders Ltd [2019] FCA 1747, which consider what will be misleading in the context of a publicly listed company's continuous disclosure obligations.

You’ve got nothing to lose: Myer, Babcock & Brown, continuous disclosure obligations and securities litigation

by Moira Saville, Partner, Alexander Morris, Partner, and David Kennelly, Graduate, King & Wood Mallesons
Published on 31 Oct 2019 • Australia
This article discusses two cases which consider, in different circumstances, what information is subject to continuous disclosure obligations in the context of claims of loss flowing from indirect, market-based causation. The decisions are both decisions of the Federal Court of Australia, being Masters v Lombe [2019] FCA 1720 (arising from the liquidation of Babcock & Brown Limited) and TPT Patrol Pty ltd v Myer Holders Ltd [2019] FCA 1747, which consider what will be misleading in the context of a publicly listed company's continuous disclosure obligations.