Australian Securities and Investments Commission v CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd (No 2)
Case
•
[2019] FCA 24
•18 January 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 24
[2019] FCA 24
18 January 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) sought to wind up three companies, CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd, Combined Financial Solutions Pty Ltd, and BDM Asia Pacific Pty Ltd, on the just and equitable ground under section 461(1)(k) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). ASIC also sought to permanently restrain the fourth respondent, a financial advisor, from providing financial services and to disqualify him from managing corporations due to repeated misappropriation of client funds. The court was required to determine whether ASIC was an aggrieved person under section 601AH(2) of the Act, warranting the reinstatement of BDM Asia Pacific’s registration before considering the winding up order. Additionally, the court had to establish the appropriate duration for the restraint and disqualification orders against the financial advisor.
The court considered the principles set out in Adler v George and examined ASIC's standing to apply for the reinstatement of BDM Asia Pacific's registration. It found that ASIC was not an aggrieved person for the purposes of section 601AH(2), rendering the winding up order redundant for that company. The court also deliberated on the appropriate duration for the restraint and disqualification orders against the financial advisor, considering the nature and extent of his misconduct. After evaluating these factors, the court determined that a 25-year restraint order and a 3-year disqualification order were appropriate.
The court concluded that it was just and equitable to wind up CFS Private Wealth and Combined Financial Solutions under section 461(1)(k) of the Act. William James Harris and Anthony Norman Connelly were appointed as joint and several liquidators for these companies. The court restrained the financial advisor from providing financial services for 25 years and disqualified him from managing corporations for 3 years. The court made corresponding orders as detailed in the decision.
The final orders included winding up CFS Private Wealth and Combined Financial Solutions, appointing liquidators, restraining the financial advisor from providing financial services for 25 years, and disqualifying him from managing corporations for 3 years. The winding up order for BDM Asia Pacific was deemed redundant as ASIC was not an aggrieved person under section 601AH(2) of the Act.
The court considered the principles set out in Adler v George and examined ASIC's standing to apply for the reinstatement of BDM Asia Pacific's registration. It found that ASIC was not an aggrieved person for the purposes of section 601AH(2), rendering the winding up order redundant for that company. The court also deliberated on the appropriate duration for the restraint and disqualification orders against the financial advisor, considering the nature and extent of his misconduct. After evaluating these factors, the court determined that a 25-year restraint order and a 3-year disqualification order were appropriate.
The court concluded that it was just and equitable to wind up CFS Private Wealth and Combined Financial Solutions under section 461(1)(k) of the Act. William James Harris and Anthony Norman Connelly were appointed as joint and several liquidators for these companies. The court restrained the financial advisor from providing financial services for 25 years and disqualified him from managing corporations for 3 years. The court made corresponding orders as detailed in the decision.
The final orders included winding up CFS Private Wealth and Combined Financial Solutions, appointing liquidators, restraining the financial advisor from providing financial services for 25 years, and disqualifying him from managing corporations for 3 years. The winding up order for BDM Asia Pacific was deemed redundant as ASIC was not an aggrieved person under section 601AH(2) of the Act.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Corporate Law & Governance
Legal Concepts
-
Winding Up & Liquidation
-
Disqualification & Restraint Orders
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 24
Most Recent Citation
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Macrolend Pty Ltd (No 3) [2025] FCA 1158
Cases Citing This Decision
8
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v EFX17
[2020] HCATrans 211
Cases Cited
27
Statutory Material Cited
3
CFS Private Wealth Pty Ltd
[2018] FCA 1070
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Adler
[2001] NSWSC 451