Paying for what you get or backing a roughie?

3 November 2017
| By Outsider |
image
image
expand image

Call Outsider an old cynic and he will not disagree but news that the Federal Court had delivered a judgement upholding the appeals of the defendants in the so-called Prime Trust case makes this old journo feel vindicated.

You see, part of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s (ASIC’s) case for pursuing an industry funding model was its ability to fund litigation and Outsider reckons that represents going down an extremely slippery slope littered with rapacious lawyers.

ASIC has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars pursuing the Prime Trust case and seems not to have won anything approaching a victory so Outsider questions whether planners should be asked to fund such projects.

Outsider doesn’t mind a flutter, but he has been following ASIC’s legal form for some time and regards it as a long-odds “roughie”.

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

2 months 2 weeks ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

2 months 2 weeks ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

4 months 3 weeks ago

ASIC has suspended the Australian Financial Services Licence of a Melbourne-based financial advice firm....

5 days 6 hours ago

The corporate regulator has issued infringement notices to three AFSLs whose financial advisers provided personal advice to a retail client while unregistered....

1 week 3 days ago

ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test....

2 weeks 1 day ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND