Supreme Court grants ASIC’s wish

Financial Services

5 February 2016
| By Nicholas |
image
image
expand image

A Queenslander who encouraged investors to contribute more than $1.5 million to a group, has been permanently restrained from providing financial services, by the Supreme Court.

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has applied for Dr Roger Munro to be permanently restrained from providing financial services, after it found he had being operating a financial services business in Australia without an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL) since August 2011, with the assistance of his wife, Kathleen Munro.

The court heard that Dr Munro would approach potential participants in Australia, often family members or friends, requesting them to provide money which would be pooled and used by the first respondent to conduct trading through an entity, with a minimum investment of $20,000.

In a submission to the court, Dr Munro claimed that the true nature of the relationship between the participants and himself (or rather the entity through which the trading was conducted) was that of lender and borrower and he was not therefore dealing in a financial product, however the court rejected the claim.

The court declared that Dr Munro had contravened section 911A of the Corporations Act and ordered that he be permanently restrained from carrying on a financial services business in this jurisdiction, without holding an AFSL.

In making the declaration, the court stated that Dr Munro "has sought and obtained funds from investors within Australia who have paid him large sums of money for trading in international markets in circumstances where he does not hold an AFSL".

"In such circumstances the public interest and the marking of the court's disapproval of such conduct makes it appropriate to grant some form of declaratory relief".

The court also order that Kathleen Munro be permanently restrained from permitting or authorising Dr Munro from using any bank or brokerage accounts in her name for the purposes of the first respondent carrying on a financial services business within this jurisdiction (Australia) without the first respondent holding an ASFL.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

GG

So shareholders lose a dividend plus have seen the erosion of value. Qantas decides to clawback remuneration from Alan ...

3 weeks 6 days ago
Denise Baker

This is why I left my last position. There was no interest in giving the client quality time, it was all about bumping ...

3 weeks 6 days ago
gonski

So the Hayne Royal Commission has left us with this. What a sad day for the financial planning industry. Clearly most ...

4 weeks ago

The decision whether to proceed with a $100 million settlement for members of the buyer of last resort class action against AMP has been decided in the Federal Court....

1 week 5 days ago

A former Brisbane financial adviser has been found guilty of 28 counts of fraud where his clients lost $5.9 million....

3 weeks 5 days ago

The difference between a Record of Advice and Statement of Advice is the crux of the FSCP’s latest determination against a relevant provider. ...

4 weeks 1 day ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS