EOFY Sale · Save up to $750 off your legals · Ends 30 June

Claim offer
Selected cases

Federal Court of Australia · [2026] FCA 405

ASIC v Electro Optic Systems

A Federal Court continuous disclosure case about revenue guidance, internal forecast information and a $4 million penalty.

Federal Court of Australia8 Apr 2026

Plain-English explainers, not legal advice. Check the linked official source before you rely on a specific section, and get advice for your situation.

Get legal help

Start here

Quick read

  • Listed companies and investor-facing businesses need a trigger process for forecast changes.
  • A Federal Court continuous disclosure case about revenue guidance, internal forecast information and a $4 million penalty.

Use this to check

  • Market guidance should be monitored against current internal information.
  • Forecast information can become disclosable before the next scheduled market update.
  • A continuing contravention can accrue day by day while required disclosure is not made.

Decision snapshot

  1. 1

    What happened

    • ASIC brought proceedings against Electro Optic Systems Holdings Limited, a listed company.
    • EOS had announced on 29 June 2022 that it expected 2022 revenue to equal or exceed its 2021 revenue of $212.3 million.
    • EOS admitted that by 25 July 2022 it was aware there was no reasonable basis to consider it was likely to achieve that revenue, and that revenue was more likely to be $164 million with a possible additional $27 million.
    • The Court found the July 2022 forecast information was not generally available, would have had a material effect on EOS shares if generally available, and should have been disclosed to the ASX.
  2. 2

    What the court had to decide

    • The Court considered admitted contraventions of s 674A(2) of the Corporations Act, including whether EOS was aware of material forecast information, whether it was required by ASX Listing Rule 3.1 to notify the ASX, and the appropriate pecuniary penalty.
  3. 3

    What the court decided

    • The Federal Court declared that EOS contravened s 674A(2) of the Corporations Act from 25 July 2022 until 31 October 2022 and ordered EOS to pay a $4 million pecuniary penalty plus ASIC's costs.

Practical impact

Practical read

  • Listed companies and investor-facing businesses need a trigger process for forecast changes.
  • Once management knows earlier guidance no longer has a reasonable basis, the disclosure question should be escalated immediately.

Useful next steps

  • Market guidance should be monitored against current internal information.
  • Forecast information can become disclosable before the next scheduled market update.
  • A continuing contravention can accrue day by day while required disclosure is not made.
  • Boards should document escalation, materiality assessment and disclosure decisions.
  • Assign ownership for monitoring public guidance against internal forecasts.

Practical read

This is a continuous disclosure case about stale guidance. EOS had given the market a revenue expectation. Within weeks, the company had information showing that expectation no longer had a reasonable basis. The Court declared a contravention for the period in which that information was not announced.

The numbers matter because they make the disclosure issue concrete: earlier guidance pointed to at least $212.3 million, while the later internal forecast information pointed to $164 million with a possible further $27 million. The Court ordered EOS to pay a $4 million penalty.

For founders, directors and finance teams, the lesson is broader than listed-company law. Any investor-facing forecast should have a monitoring owner. If a major contract slips, a new-business pipeline weakens or a forecast assumption falls away, the business needs a documented escalation process. Waiting until the next planned update can be dangerous when the information is already material.

Checks to run

Key points

  • Assign ownership for monitoring public guidance against internal forecasts.
  • Escalate contract delays, revenue misses and pipeline changes as soon as they affect guidance assumptions.
  • Keep board papers showing when materiality and disclosure were considered.
  • Avoid investor updates that outrun the evidence behind the forecast.
  • Review continuous disclosure training for directors and senior finance staff.

Key takeaways

  • Market guidance should be monitored against current internal information.
  • Forecast information can become disclosable before the next scheduled market update.
  • A continuing contravention can accrue day by day while required disclosure is not made.
  • Boards should document escalation, materiality assessment and disclosure decisions.

Related topics

Companies & StartupsFinance, Payments & Security

How Sprintlaw can help

Shareholders AgreementRegulatory Compliance