A Federal Court ruling held Brambles engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and breached continuous disclosure obligations during 2016–2017, potentially enabling a decade-delayed shareholder compensation claim.

The ruling risks a compensation bill exceeding $100 million after Brambles misled investors about its 2016–17 forecasts.

Judge Murphy highlighted the judgment’s length, reflecting the case’s complexity after reviewing about 2,600 documents.

Brambles acknowledged the ruling, notes it has insurance, and a spokesperson said damage estimates are speculative while it considers an appeal.

The judge noted Brambles waited too long to withdraw its earnings guidance when it became clear the forecast wouldn’t be met, with even a small miss impacting FY17 guidance.

Maurice Blackburn’s Rebecca Gilsenan called the outcome a historic win for shareholders and market integrity, signaling a potential shift in enforcing market-disclosure rights.

This case marks the first Australian shareholder class-action trial win, following previous dismissals against other companies.

Gilsenan described the decision as a crucial win for market integrity.

A subsequent process will determine the final damages owed to affected shareholders.

Brambles’ share price slumped 16% on the ruling, wiping about $3.1 billion from market value in a single day.

The 1,233-page judgment, delivered after a five-week trial in 2022, outlines a framework for calculating damages, including that 85% of abnormal returns within the 35-day window could be attributed to the misleading conduct in relation to the FY17 guidance.

The class action argued Brambles reaffirmed earnings guidance in late 2016, then downgraded it about 11 weeks later, triggering a 15.8% drop followed by a 9.9% decline after further downgrades.