Asset restraint orders against OTC providers
The corporate watchdog has applied for interim asset restraint orders against two over the counter (OTC) derivatives providers while it pursues investigations.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) applied to the Federal Court for the restraint orders against Maxi EFX Global AU Pty Ltd (trading as EuropeFX) and BrightAU Capital Pty Ltd (trading as TradeFred), both of which are Corporate Authorised Representatives of Union Standard International Group Pty Ltd (trading as USGFX).
Currently, there have been no findings of contraventions of the Corporations Act against any party.
An ASIC announcement said: “On 12 December 2019, the Court also made asset restraint orders against USGFX on an ex parte basis.
“On 17 December 2019, those orders were vacated by the Court. USGFX gave an undertaking to the Court to keep amounts of $182,000 and $53,067.33 in a separate bank account. No further asset restraint orders were made against USG.”
The asset restraint orders did not prevent EuropeFX and TradeFred from making payments in the ordinary course of business to customers or creditors, ASIC said.
It noted that the Court also restricted overseas travel of USGFX and TradeFred director, John Carlton Martin. EuropeFX director, Pedro Eduardo Sasso, would need to notify ASIC prior to leaving Australia.
The matter will be before court on 17 February, 2020.
Recommended for you
As the industry navigates the fallout from recent product failures, two major AFSLs have detailed their APL selection process and relationship with research houses, warning a selection error could “destroy” a licensee.
The impending retirement of financial advisers in their 50s could see the profession face significant succession challenges over the coming decade and younger advisers may not be the answer.
With a third of AFSLs being solo advisers, how can they navigate key person risk and ensure they are still attractive propositions for buyers when it comes to their succession planning?
A quarter of advisers who commenced on the FAR within the last two years have already switched licensees or practices, adding validity to practice owners’ professional year (PY) concerns.
