Paying for what you get or backing a roughie?

3 November 2017
| By Outsider |
image
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

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

1 month 3 weeks ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

2 months 2 weeks ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

2 months 3 weeks ago

ASIC has canceled the AFSL of Sydney-based asset consultant and research firm....

2 weeks 6 days ago

The Reserve Bank of Australia has announced its latest interest rate decision following this week's monetary policy meeting....

4 weeks 1 day ago

ASIC has banned a Melbourne-based financial adviser for eight years over false and misleading statements regarding clients’ superannuation investments....

1 week 1 day ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
moneymanagement logo