Not every decision of a regulator such as APRA is reviewable but 2 recent judgments relating to APRA decisions are noteworthy.

In Porter v Australian Prudential Regulations Authority [2009] FCA 1148 the Federal Court ordered that APRA pay the costs of a solicitor and her client relating to a notice by APRA to the solicitor to produce a computer hard drive relating to an insurance company regulated by APRA.

In reviewing the facts Judge Perram concluded that “the proceedings were, as a matter of substance, initiated by APRA and that Ms Shand and Mr Porter were compelled to protect themselves from the issue and service of a notice which I have found, respectively, to be unreasonable and reprehensible”. With reference to the timing of the notice the Judge said “this is one of those cases where the failure by the decision maker to give any reasons for the decision permits the inference to be drawn that he had no good reason for it”.

In Stitt and Australian Prudential Regulation Authority [2009] AATA 601 the Administrative Appeals Tribunal set aside a decision by a delegate of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) to disqualify Robert Reginald Stitt from being or acting as the holder of a senior insurance role pursuant to s 25A(1) of the Insurance Act. The delegate decided that Mr Stitt was not a fit and proper person to be or act as a director or senior manager of a general insurer under s 24(1) of the Act. Mr Stitt was a non-executive director of HIH Insurance Limited.

The Tribunal was “not persuaded that any contravention of the standard of diligence, competence and experience has been made out.”