ASIC succeeds in conflicted remuneration case against financial advice licensee

On the 29 February, the Federal Court found that R M Capital Pty Ltd (RM Capital) failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that its authorised representative, the SMSF Club Pty Ltd (SMSF Club), did not accept conflicted remuneration.

ASIC’s case alleged that SMSF Club advised its clients to set up self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) to buy real property marketed by real estate agent, Positive RealEstate Pty Ltd (Positive RealEstate).

ASIC alleged that between December 2013 and July 2016 and pursuant to referral agreements, Positive RealEstate paid SMSF Club around $5,000 each time a client bought a property through them using their SMSF.

ASIC contended that SMSF Club contravened s963G of the Corporations Act by accepting payments from Positive RealEstate, and RM Capital contravened s963F of the Corporations Act by failing to take reasonable steps to ensure SMSF Club did not accept the payments.

The Court adjourned the proceeding to consider (a) relief that should ordered against RM Capital and (b) orders to be made in relation to SMSF Club.

The matter is listed for mention on 7 March 2024 at 11.15am AWST.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *