X v Australian Prudential Regulation Authority

Administrative law – Judicial review – Injunction and declaratory relief – s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – Whether the appellants are entitled to an order restraining the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority ("APRA") from acting on a "preliminary view" formed by its Senior Manager that the first and third appellants were not "fit and proper" to act as senior managers of a foreign general insurer.

Administrative law – Royal Commissions ¬– Protection of witnesses – s 6M of the Royal Commissions Act 1902 (Cth) – Appellants gave evidence at the HIH Royal Commission – Whether s 6M prevents the use of that evidence by APRA in deciding whether to disqualify the first and third appellants pursuant to s 25A of the Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) – Whether potential disqualification caused a "disadvantage" to the appellants – Whether potential disqualification arose "for or on account of" the first and third appellants' evidence to the Royal Commission – Whether the proper exercise of APRA's statutory powers and functions may constitute a "disadvantage" arising "for or on account of" evidence given before a Royal Commission.

Insurance –– Prudential regulation – Disqualification – APRA may take steps pursuant to s 25A of the Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) where a person is not "fit and proper" to act as a senior manager of a foreign general insurer – Whether APRA may take into account evidence given at a Royal Commission by or about that person – Whether s 6M of the Royal Commissions Act 1902 (Cth) prevents the use of such evidence for the purposes of s 25A of the Insurance Act 1973 (Cth).

Statutes – Interpretation – Whether s 6M of the Royal Commissions Act 1902 (Cth) distinguishes between the giving of evidence and the content of the evidence so given.

Words and phrases – "for or on account of", "disadvantage".

Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) – s 25A.

Royal Commissions Act 1902 (Cth) – s 6M.