ASIC flags class order relief on Govt class action changes

ASIC/managed-investment-scheme/daniel-crennan/litigation-funding/

30 July 2020
| By Mike |
image
image image
expand image

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has flagged issues with implementing the Government’s proposals for class action litigation funding to be subject to financial services regulation and managed investment scheme (MIS) arrangements.

The regulator has pointed out that the existing legal arrangements were never intended to cover litigation funding, stating “financial services and managed investment scheme regulation was not specifically designed to regulate litigation funding”.

In doing so, ASIC’s deputy chair, Daniel Crennan QC, flagged there may be a need for class order relief.

ASIC’s comments to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services inquiry into the Government’s changes come amid earlier revelations that the regulator was given barely 24 hours’ notice of the Government’s intentions and amid claims by the Labor Opposition that the Government has been motivated by lobbying by particular US business groups.

In its opening statement, ASIC said that issues arose from the fact that the law was not designed to handle litigation funding, not least around product disclosure statements.

“We are aware from submissions and earlier hearings that there is considerable interest in the fees and profit margins of litigation funders and the risk of financial default by litigation funders. However, the financial services licensing and managed investment scheme regimes do not extend to price or prudential regulation,” it said.

“Further, litigation funding schemes may have some difficulties complying with some of the relevant laws.

For example:

  • The requirement to provide a Product Disclosure Statement does not work easily with open class actions.
  • Another challenging example relates to the rules in relation to withdrawal from managed investment schemes. There are specific rules for withdrawal from illiquid schemes that are not necessarily consistent with Court rules in relation to withdrawal from class actions.

“In light of these and other issues and as noted in the Government’s Explanatory Statement, ASIC may need to give some relief to apply the managed investment scheme and financial services licensing regimes to litigation funding.”

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

4 months 3 weeks ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

5 months ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

7 months ago

Commonwealth Bank has formally dropped to zero advisers following LGT Crestone’s acquisition of its advice arm – some six years on from the Hayne royal commission. ...

3 weeks 4 days ago

The FSCP has issued a written direction to an adviser who charged clients “extraordinary fees” for inappropriate and conflicted advice, as well as encouraged them to swit...

1 week ago

ASIC has cancelled the AFSL of an advice firm associated with Shield and First Guardian collapses, and permanently banned its responsible manager. ...

2 weeks 3 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
DomaCom DFS Mortgage
92.15 3 y p.a(%)
3