Mayfair 101’s Mawhinney sues ASIC for defamation
Mayfair 101 head, James Mawhinney, is suing the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and deputy chair Sarah Court for defamation.
This followed publication of a media release stating Mawhinney had caused 500 investors to lose $211 million.
He is alleging Court provided quotes to the release stating:
- He knowingly misled the public by marketing high-risk products as low risk, and thereby caused 500 investors in the Mayfair 101 group to lose approximately $211 million;
- By reason of his serious misconduct in advertising investments, receiving or soliciting funds and misleading marketing, he caused 500 investors in the Mayfair 101 group to lose approximately $211 million; and
- By reason of his serious misconduct in advertising investments, receiving or soliciting funds and misleading marketing, he caused so much harm to investors in Mayfair 101, that, unless restrained by injunctions of the court while proceedings continue, he would cause further harm to investors.
He was also seeking claims for damages and aggravated damages arising from his reputation being “seriously injured” as well as for “distress and embarrassment” caused by the release.
The proceedings were filed in the Federal Court of Western Australia where Mawhinney resided.
Last month, Mawhinney successfully overturned a 20-year ban on him from advertising investments and raising funds from the public through financial products.
Recommended for you
David Sipina has been sentenced to three years under an intensive correction order for his role in the unlicensed Courtenay House financial services.
As AFSLs endeavour to meet their breach reporting obligations, a legal expert has emphasised why robust documentation will prove fruitful, particularly in the face of potential regulatory investigations.
Betashares has named the top Australian suburbs with the highest spare cash flow, shining a light on where financial advisers could eye out potential clients.
A relevant provider has received a written direction from the Financial Services and Credit Panel after a superannuation rollover resulted in tax bill of over $200,000 for a client.