ASIC commences civil penalty proceedings against Commonwealth Bank of Australia for BBSW conduct (2018)

Settled

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (asic-18-024mr-price-manipulation-2018) by email

In January 2018 ASIC began Federal Court civil penalty proceedings against Commonwealth Bank of Australia over BBSW conduct in 2012, alleging unconscionable conduct and market manipulation on three occasions. ASIC later reported that on 21 June 2018 the court imposed A$5 million in penalties after CBA admitted attempting unconscionable conduct on five occasions, alongside an enforceable undertaking with A$15 million for community benefit.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

A$5m

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars. This regulator states penalties in AUD. The figure is recorded as published and is not converted, so it does not appear in the USD totals or medians used elsewhere on this site.

What is alleged to have happened

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission announced this matter on January 30, 2018 as release 18-024MR. ASIC alleged that on three occasions between January and October 2012 CBA traded with the intention of affecting the BBSW fixing so as to maximise profit or minimise loss, to the detriment of counterparties, and that it did not disclose this. This library tags the matter as price manipulation.

Outcome: ASIC release 18-210MR says that on 21 June 2018 the Federal Court in Melbourne imposed pecuniary penalties totalling A$5 million on CBA for attempting to engage in unconscionable conduct in relation to BBSW, after CBA admitted attempting to affect where BBSW set on five occasions between 31 January and 15 June 2012 and that it failed to ensure financial services were provided honestly and fairly and traders adequately trained. In the same release ASIC says CBA entered a court enforceable undertaking to pay A$15 million for community benefit and A$5 million toward ASIC's costs, and to engage an independent expert. The release reports the outcome as an admission and agreed penalty, so this is recorded as settled; it does not say whether the market manipulation allegations were pursued, and the release date is not shown in the text we read, so the court date is used. The A$5 million is stored in the native-currency field only.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2018-01-30 ASIC media release
2. 2018-06-21 Federal Court imposes A$5 million penalties on CBA; ASIC accepts enforceable undertaking

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• ASIC media release
• ASIC media release 18-210MR (penalty and enforceable undertaking)

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.