In brief — Restrict­ed access aimed at unso­licit­ed share offers

The gov­ern­ment recent­ly brought into force new laws reg­u­lat­ing access to share reg­is­ters. Although aimed pri­mar­i­ly at unso­licit­ed share offers, the Cor­po­ra­tions Amend­ment (No 1) Act 2010 restricts access to reg­is­ters for a far wider range of users.

How the Act works 

Pre­vi­ous­ly any per­son could access infor­ma­tion from a share reg­is­ter, pro­vid­ed they paid the nec­es­sary fee. The only legal lim­i­ta­tion was that they could not sub­se­quent­ly use the infor­ma­tion for a pur­pose unre­lat­ed to the shareholding.

Under the new Act, a per­son who applies to access the reg­is­ter will have to dis­close to the com­pa­ny the pur­pose for which they intend to use the infor­ma­tion. If that is a ​“pre­scribed pur­pose”, the com­pa­ny will have the right to refuse access.

What is a pre­scribed purpose? 

The Cor­po­ra­tions Amend­ment Reg­u­la­tions 2010 (No. 10) define a pre­scribed pur­pose as:

  • Spe­cif­ic groups in the com­mu­ni­ty (such as char­i­ties) solic­it­ing dona­tions from shareholders
  • Bro­kers solic­it­ing clients 
  • Obtain­ing infor­ma­tion about the per­son­al wealth of clients
  • Mak­ing off-mar­ket offers to pur­chase secu­ri­ties (oth­er than for a takeover of an unlist­ed company)
Prob­lem­at­ic con­se­quences of the new laws

The new rules tip the bal­ance in favour of com­pa­nies. In prac­tice, com­pa­nies should be enti­tled to block approach­es by share raiders like David Tweed. How­ev­er, it may also allow com­pa­nies to block inves­ti­ga­tions by finan­cial jour­nal­ists, lead­ing to con­cerns this may give com­pa­nies a con­ve­nient means of obstruct­ing legit­i­mate media inquiries. 

For more infor­ma­tion on this sub­ject, please see Crack­down aimed at David Tweed could have unex­pect­ed con­se­quences and Pub­lic access to com­pa­ny reg­is­ters — the prop­er pur­pose test.

For fur­ther infor­ma­tion please contact:

If you would like to repub­lish this arti­cle, it is gen­er­al­ly approved, but pri­or to doing so please con­tact the Mar­ket­ing team at marketing@​swaab.​com.​au. This arti­cle is not legal advice and the views and com­ments are of a gen­er­al nature only. This arti­cle is not to be relied upon in sub­sti­tu­tion for detailed legal advice.

Publications

When is entry into a lot with­out the lot own­er’s con­sent per­mit­ted to car­ry out repair work to com­mon prop­er­ty? When there is an emergency

When is entry into a lot with­out the lot own­er’s con­sent per­mit­ted to car­ry out repair work to com­mon prop­er­ty? When…

A Short Sto­ry about Bullying

In the recent Fair Work Com­mis­sion deci­sion of Appli­ca­tion by Gary Whitham [2026] FWC 3322, Deputy Pres­i­dent Col­man gave short…

Decen­ni­al insur­ance for new apart­ment buildings

The New South Wales Gov­ern­ment con­tin­ues to address the lack of con­fi­dence in the build­ing indus­try, par­tic­u­lar­ly in rela­tion to…

In the News

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“Aussies warned as boss­es flag ​‘unusu­al’ rea­son for upcom­ing leave rush”, pub­lished in Yahoo News on 13 Sep­tem­ber 2026

When to expect the GTA 6 leave rush: Aussie work­ers book annu­al leave ahead of the game launch as employ­ers warn…

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“What does the access-to-super debate mean for HR?”, pub­lished in HR Leader on 11 Sep­tem­ber 2026

Access to Super­an­nu­a­tion: What Aus­tralian HR Lead­ers Need to Know About Employ­ee Well­be­ing, Finan­cial Hard­ship and Retire­ment SavingsMichael Byrnes is quot­ed…

Michael Byrnes quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“First Right to Dis­con­nect rul­ing clar­i­fies when after-hours pres­sure cross­es the line”, pub­lished in AHRI AM on 8 Sep­tem­ber 2026

Australia’s land­mark Right to Dis­con­nect rul­ing sets new guid­ance on after-hours employ­ee con­tact, work­place expec­ta­tions, and employ­er oblig­a­tions under Fair…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information