Selected cases

Federal Court of Australia · [2026] FCA 958

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Noumi Limited (No 7)

The Federal Court found that Noumi's former managing director and CEO failed to take reasonable steps over inventory and revenue problems...

Federal Court of Australia22 July 2026

Plain-English explainers, not legal advice. Use the linked official source for section-level detail, and get advice for your situation.

Get legal help

Start here

Quick read

  • A senior executive cannot treat financial reporting as a finance-team problem when operational facts show that inventory may be unsaleable or revenue conditions have not...
  • The Federal Court found that Noumi's former managing director and CEO failed to take reasonable steps over inventory and revenue problems affecting the company's...

Use this to check

  • Financial reporting depends on operational evidence, not invoice creation alone
  • Unsaleable stock needs a documented write-down process and clear ownership
  • Directors and senior officers should investigate warning signs and brief the board

Decision snapshot

  1. What happened

    • Noumi, then called Freedom Foods Group, manufactured food and beverage products.
    • Its accounts included inventory that ASIC alleged was unsaleable and revenue from lactoferrin invoices even though customer approval had not been obtained, sufficient product had not been produced, nothing had been delivered and no payment had been made.
    • ASIC pursued former managing director and CEO Rory Macleod over the 2019 full-year and 2020 half-year reports.
  2. What the court had to decide

    • Did Mr Macleod take all reasonable steps to secure accurate financial reporting and exercise the care and diligence required of a director and officer, and had ASIC proved its separate false-information and continuous-disclosure claims?
  3. What the court decided

    • Subject to defences still to be heard, the Court found contraventions of section 344(1) for the 2020 half-year report and section 180(1) for that report and a limited period concerning the 2019 report.
    • ASIC did not establish its claims under sections 1309(2) or 674(2A), or its broader 2019 case.
    • Penalties, disqualification, relief defences and final declarations remain for a later stage.

Practical impact

Practical read

  • A senior executive cannot treat financial reporting as a finance-team problem when operational facts show that inventory may be unsaleable or revenue conditions have not been met.
  • The practical duty is to investigate, escalate and correct, while keeping the board informed.

Useful next steps

  • Financial reporting depends on operational evidence, not invoice creation alone
  • Unsaleable stock needs a documented write-down process and clear ownership
  • Directors and senior officers should investigate warning signs and brief the board
  • A mixed court result should be reported accurately
  • Give each material inventory category a named owner and review date

The inventory problem inside the accounts

Freedom Foods used an enterprise system to track inventory. The disputed categories included stock that had expired, failed quality requirements, did not meet minimum shelf-life requirements or, in some cases, had never existed as physical stock.

ASIC alleged that at least $20 million of unsaleable inventory had not been properly written down. The evidence also showed that Mr Macleod had put himself in a central approval position: stock was not to be disposed of or written off without his authority.

Revenue was recorded before the sale was complete

The half-year accounts included about $9.8 million of lactoferrin invoices. The purchase order required regulatory approval and product meeting the customer's purity requirements.

At the relevant time, approval had not been obtained, sufficient product had not been produced, no product had been supplied or collected, and the customer had not paid. The Court found contraventions linked to the resulting half-year report.

Accounting signalOperational question
Invoice raisedHave the contract's conditions for recognising revenue been met?
Inventory remains in the systemIs it saleable at a supportable value?
A problem is described as temporaryWhat evidence supports that view and when will it be reassessed?

The judgment was a mixed result

The Court found that Mr Macleod contravened the reasonable-steps reporting duty for the 2020 half-year report. It also found breaches of the care and diligence duty concerning that report and, more narrowly, a failure from November 2019 to qualify, withdraw or correct the 2019 report and inform the board and ASX.

ASIC did not prove all of its case. It failed on the false-information allegation, the continuous-disclosure allegation against Mr Macleod and broader aspects of the 2019 claims. The Court also stressed that dishonesty was not alleged.

Key points

  • Give each material inventory category a named owner and review date
  • Require evidence that revenue-recognition conditions are satisfied
  • Escalate disagreements between finance and operations
  • Record why a write-down, provision or correction was accepted or rejected

Common questions

Did the Court find dishonesty?

No. ASIC expressly did not allege dishonesty against Mr Macleod. The findings concerned reasonable steps, care and diligence, and financial reporting obligations.

Did ASIC win every allegation?

No. The Court rejected the false-information claim, the continuous-disclosure claim against Mr Macleod and substantial parts of the 2019 reporting case.

Why is another hearing required?

The Court has not yet decided Mr Macleod's statutory relief defences, penalties, disqualification or final declarations.

Related topics

How Sprintlaw can help

Update history

Case22 July 2026

Court rules on Noumi CEO's financial reporting duties

The Federal Court made limited findings against Noumi's former managing director and CEO concerning inventory, revenue and financial reporting.