ASIC flags new evidence in Mayfair 101 retrial, as Mawhinney pushes to knock out regulator’s case

Justice O’Callaghan will decide if Mayfair 101 boss James Mawhinney can knock out elements of ASIC’s case.

Mayfair 101 managing director James Mawhinney at Mission Beach in 2022 with Dunk Island in the background. Picture: Peter Carruthers

The looming retrial of Mayfair 101 and its boss James Mawhinney may face a shake-up after the corporate regulator flagged plans to issue new evidence alongside a move to step away from existing material.

In the Federal Court on Monday, lawyers for the Australian Securities & Investments Commission flagged plans to put new evidence before the Mayfair retrial.

ASIC told Justice David O’Callaghan that it would seek to exclude some evidence it had used in the original trial of Mr Mawhinney, which saw him slapped with a 20-year ban on fundraising and advertising financial services.

The court heard ASIC would look to drop its use of a report prepared by Deloitte in the early days of the regulator’s case against Mayfair.

However, ASIC said it would instead put forward new evidence, noting it could prove Mr Mawhinney authorised allegedly misleading marketing materials that spruiked bank-account or term deposit like products.

The regulator said Mr Mawhinney “had knowledge” of Mayfair’s marketing, which saw the group raise $210m from 128 investors.

ASIC has already had several wins against Mayfair and Mawhinney, who is fighting back against the regulator in court.

In March 2021 the Federal Court slapped a string of Mayfair companies with a $30m fine, with Mr Mawhinney’s apparel in 2022 proving unsuccessful.

However, Mr Mawhinney was partly successful in appealing his 20-year ban, with the full bench of the Federal Court remitting the case for a retrial set down for later this year.

Mr Mawhinney’s lawyers attempted to slash ASIC’s claims ahead of the retrial, applying to have Justice O’Callaghan strip out more than 50 paragraphs from the regulator’s statement of claim.

Mayfair’s lawyers argued the regulator did not clearly state the case, or sought to pin the blame on Mr Mawhinney in a move which was not in accordance with the corporation’s act.

However, lawyers for the regulator was not seeking to label Mr Mawhinney as an accessory liable for Mayfair’s conduct under the ASIC act.

Although it was set down for two days of hearing, Justice O’Callaghan concluded proceedings early on Monday. He will deliver his judgement at a later date.

Mayfair burst to public prominence after Mr Mawhinney announced a $1.6bn redevelopment plan for Dunk Island and Mission Beach in Far North Queensland in late 2019.

Mr Mawhinney had snapped up a number of homes across the coastal community under the Mayfair plans, with plans to turn Mission Beach into a tourism hotspot.