CDPP drops Clive Palmer takeover law charge after PLC conviction
Australian prosecutors have discontinued criminal proceedings against Clive Palmer over allegations tied to a 2012 takeover law breach by Palmer Leisure Coolum Pty Ltd. The decision comes days after the company was convicted and fined A$10,000, bringing ASIC's case on the matter to a close.
Highlights
- PLC was convicted on 27 October 2026 for breaching Australian takeover law and fined A$10,000.
- The CDPP withdrew the charge against Clive Palmer, considering the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth after the company's conviction.
- ASIC considers the regulatory process concluded, limiting accountability to the penalty imposed on Palmer Leisure Coolum Pty Ltd.
Case outcome follows company conviction
As reported by ASIC, citing the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, or CDPP, the CDPP told the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday that it would not proceed with the charge against Palmer.Palmer, who was a director of Palmer Leisure Coolum Pty Ltd at the time, was charged in 2018 with contravening section 631(1) of the Corporations Act 2001, through the operation of section 11.2 of the Criminal Code, for allegedly aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the company to commit the offence.
PLC was convicted of the offence on 27 October 2026 and was sentenced to a fine of A$10,000. The CDPP says its decision to discontinue the case against Palmer was made having regard to the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth.
Regulatory process now closed
ASIC says it considers the matter finalised following the CDPP's decision.The case stems from an alleged breach of Australian takeover law in 2012, but the latest court development narrows the outcome to the penalty already imposed on the company rather than on its former director.
Our earlier article on the Malaysian Court of Appeal’s ruling on commission partners explained that a lawyer described as a “commission partner” can still be treated as a partner under the Partnership Act 1961 and held personally liable for a firm’s unpaid debt. The decision overturned lower-court findings and was highlighted as potentially widening liability exposure for commission-based lawyers and professional partnership structures.
Latest Company News News
-
Afghanistan
-
Albania
-
Algeria
-
Angola
-
Argentina
-
Armenia
-
Australia
-
Austria
-
Azerbaijan
-
Bahamas
-
Bahrain
-
Bangladesh
-
Belarus
-
Belgium
-
Bolivia
-
Botswana
-
Brazil
-
Brunei
-
Bulgaria
-
Cambodia
-
Cameroon
-
Canada
-
Chile
-
China
-
Colombia
-
Congo
-
Costa Rica
-
Cote d'Ivoire
-
Croatia
-
Cuba
-
Cyprus
-
Czechia
-
DR Congo
-
Denmark
-
Dominican Republic
-
Ecuador
-
Egypt
-
El Salvador
-
Estonia
-
Eswatini
-
Ethiopia
-
Finland
-
France
-
Georgia
-
Germany
-
Ghana
-
Greece
-
Haiti
-
Hong Kong
-
Hungary
-
India
-
Indonesia
-
Iran, Islamic republic
-
Iraq
-
Ireland
-
Israel
-
Italy
-
Jamaica
-
Japan
-
Jordan
-
Kazakhstan
-
Kenya
-
Korea
-
Kuwait
-
Kyrgyzstan
-
Laos
-
Latvia
-
Lebanon
-
Lesotho
-
Libya
-
Lithuania
-
Luxembourg
-
Madagascar
-
Malaysia
-
Malta
-
Mauritius
-
Mexico
-
Moldova
-
Mongolia
-
Montenegro
-
Morocco
-
Mozambique
-
Myanmar
-
Namibia
-
Nepal
-
Netherlands
-
New Zealand
-
Nigeria
-
North Macedonia
-
Norway
-
Oman
-
Pakistan
-
Palestine
-
Panama
-
Papua New Guinea
-
Paraguay
-
Peru
-
Philippines
-
Poland
-
Portugal
-
Puerto Rico
-
Qatar
-
Reunion
-
Romania
-
Rwanda
-
Saudi Arabia
-
Serbia
-
Singapore
-
Slovakia
-
Slovenia
-
Somalia
-
South Africa
-
Spain
-
Sri Lanka
-
Sweden
-
Switzerland
-
Syria
-
Taiwan
-
Tajikistan
-
Tanzania
-
Thailand
-
Trinidad and Tobago
-
Tunisia
-
Turkey
-
UAE
-
Uganda
-
Ukraine
-
United Kingdom
-
United States
-
Uruguay
-
Uzbekistan
-
Venezuela
-
Vietnam
-
Yemen
-
Zambia
-
Zimbabwe
- Forex
- Crypto
